Mobil escapes $10m tank farm cleanup - NZ.

Page  <123
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote v8-coupe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jul 2016 at 12:35pm
v8-coupe View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 20 Jul 2002
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 3918
Originally posted by Steps Steps wrote:

That pretty well sums it up...

To put another the cat among the Pigeons.
There is another well known document/agreement that seems to be constantly re-translated and re-interpreted on a regular basis. That document is over one hundred and fifty years old and NZ is paying for things that were not included in the original nor did it take into account "future uses" as described in the posted judgment link for the Mobil document.
Why is one treated differently to the other?
The old document has had a lot more included and attributed to it than was ever written down.
Why could those legal attributes, interpretations and re-interpretational procedures not be used on the Mobil document?
As we all know. In Law there is no black or white. Only shades of grey and the Lawyer with the best gift of the gab usually wins. Whether the judgement is correct or not.
The real winners from both those documents are the Lawyers and the real losers are the tax/rate payers. As usual.
Legasea Legend Member
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (2) Likes(2)   Quote SaltyC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jul 2016 at 12:45pm
SaltyC View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003
Location: Auckland, NZ
Status: Offline
Points: 3684
Good god, this thread gets more bizarre by the minute!

I have given up trying to interpret, let alone respond to, the bizarre "why isn't the world the way I want it" postings from the bull artist formally known as Pugwash, but now we have someone who can't tell the difference between the Treaty of Waitangi and a commercial lease agreement.

God help us all!
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote Finatic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jul 2016 at 12:59pm
Finatic View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Location: Here
Status: Offline
Points: 17198
Good god! I'll never get the minutes of my life back that I just spent reading through this threadLOL


What's the cheapest type of meat? Dear balls. They're under a buck.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (2) Likes(2)   Quote cirrus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jul 2016 at 1:14pm
cirrus View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium


Joined: 07 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 9733
Ha Ha. Love him or hate him the Pugster does put up some topics that  get lots of reads and comments.

If it were fire wood i would rate Pugster.


Burn Quality----HOT

Burn duration --LONG

Availability ----Occasionally

LOLLOLLOL
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote OuttaHere Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jul 2016 at 2:00pm
OuttaHere View Drop Down
Platinum
Platinum


Joined: 05 Oct 2015
Location: NZ
Status: Offline
Points: 2707
Originally posted by SaltyC SaltyC wrote:

Good god, this thread gets more bizarre by the minute!

I have given up trying to interpret, let alone respond to, the bizarre "why isn't the world the way I want it" postings from the bull artist formally known as Pugwash, but now we have someone who can't tell the difference between the Treaty of Waitangi and a commercial lease agreement.

God help us all!
 
 
Pretty much, a document that was written up by a bunch of colonialists who were out to shaft everyone and the other party was a loose collective of barely literate folk who didn't comprehend many of the concepts they were supposedly signing up to. Talk about lacking "meeting of the minds".
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote pjc Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jul 2016 at 5:08pm
pjc View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2010
Location: papakura
Status: Offline
Points: 12463
Originally posted by SaltyC SaltyC wrote:

Good god, this thread gets more bizarre by the minute!

I have given up trying to interpret, let alone respond to, the bizarre "why isn't the world the way I want it" postings from the bull artist formally known as Pugwash, but now we have someone who can't tell the difference between the Treaty of Waitangi and a commercial lease agreement.

God help us all!
The world is still flat,fell over last night with my tin foil hat getting dented.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote v8-coupe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jul 2016 at 5:26pm
v8-coupe View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 20 Jul 2002
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 3918
Originally posted by Rozboon Rozboon wrote:

Originally posted by SaltyC SaltyC wrote:

Good god, this thread gets more bizarre by the minute!

I have given up trying to interpret, let alone respond to, the bizarre "why isn't the world the way I want it" postings from the bull artist formally known as Pugwash, but now we have someone who can't tell the difference between the Treaty of Waitangi and a commercial lease agreement.

God help us all!

 
 
Pretty much, a document that was written up by a bunch of colonialists who were out to shaft everyone and the other party was a loose collective of barely literate folk who didn't comprehend many of the concepts they were supposedly signing up to. Talk about lacking "meeting of the minds".


You both miss the point.
The Treaty is a legal document. Does not matter whether it was a lease, rental agreement or hire purchase agreement. It is a legal document.
Since the seventies that legal document has been re-interpreted by various modern legal minds who have come up with their own ideas as to what the legal definition of the document and its scope is. Those legal interpretations change regularly.
My question was simply why one legal document can be rejigged to suit modern requirements, whereas there seems to be a belief that the Mobil document is old and badly written so therefore the council got what it deserved,
Why could this old Mobil document not be rejigged under current, modern laws/interpretations to represent the mood of the day? Ecological thoughts are different today than they were say forty years ago.
Simple question really and I would really like to know why one legal document can be treated differently to another under the legal process.
Perhaps one of you two can give me a sensible answer relating to law rather than personal opinions and attacks.
Take care and have a good day.
Cheers.
Legasea Legend Member
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Capt Asparagus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jul 2016 at 7:33pm
Capt Asparagus View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 18 Sep 2002
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 13163
Because there is a big difference between a vague document written in two separate languages with in exact translations, and very broad terms, and a strictly legal, binding, document.
It is only my overwhelming natural humility that mars my perfection.

Captain Asparagus, Superhero, Adventurer.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote OuttaHere Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2016 at 9:44am
OuttaHere View Drop Down
Platinum
Platinum


Joined: 05 Oct 2015
Location: NZ
Status: Offline
Points: 2707
Originally posted by v8-coupe v8-coupe wrote:

Simple question really and I would really like to know why one legal document can be treated differently to another under the legal process.
Perhaps one of you two can give me a sensible answer relating to law rather than personal opinions and attacks.
Take care and have a good day.
Cheers.
 
Put simply, by modern legal standards the treaty wouldn't constitute a legal document (in the form of a binding contract) because the document itself and the circumstance it was agreed to under lacks several elements that are considered key to a valid contract.
One of these elements is called "meeting of the minds", also referred to as mutual agreement - the essence of this is that both parties understand what they are commiting to and that the terms are interpreted the same way by both parties.
In order for the treaty to be used as the basis for all of the modern litigation that has become associated with it, some sort of legal interpretation has to have happened, however there is much disagreement about what was intended by the various parts of it (i.e. the meaning of "sovereignty" in the context of that document).
The lease agreement, however, was no doubt prepared and reviewed by legal types, and the whole point of a written legal contract is to remove as much ambiguity as possible and set the terms of the agreement out in black and white. What Development Auckland has essentially done here is tried to argue that they meant something else (under the "clean and tidy" clause of the agreement) to what was understood by Mobil, hence the disagreement, but what the courts have more or less held here is that if you want it as part of the contract you need to explicitly include it.
 
postscript: I am not a lawyer, I just have a passing fascination with legalese... 
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote cirrus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2016 at 10:11am
cirrus View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium


Joined: 07 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 9733
This and the Rena have achieved the desired outcome. That is PRECEDENT set for future issues like these.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote v8-coupe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2016 at 12:30pm
v8-coupe View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 20 Jul 2002
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 3918
Originally posted by Rozboon Rozboon wrote:

Originally posted by v8-coupe v8-coupe wrote:

Simple question really and I would really like to know why one legal document can be treated differently to another under the legal process.
Perhaps one of you two can give me a sensible answer relating to law rather than personal opinions and attacks.
Take care and have a good day.
Cheers.

 
Put simply, by modern legal standards the treaty wouldn't constitute a legal document (in the form of a binding contract) because the document itself and the circumstance it was agreed to under lacks several elements that are considered key to a valid contract.
One of these elements is called "meeting of the minds", also referred to as mutual agreement - the essence of this is that both parties understand what they are commiting to and that the terms are interpreted the same way by both parties.
In order for the treaty to be used as the basis for all of the modern litigation that has become associated with it, some sort of legal interpretation has to have happened, however there is much disagreement about what was intended by the various parts of it (i.e. the meaning of "sovereignty" in the context of that document).
The lease agreement, however, was no doubt prepared and reviewed by legal types, and the whole point of a written legal contract is to remove as much ambiguity as possible and set the terms of the agreement out in black and white. What Development Auckland has essentially done here is tried to argue that they meant something else (under the "clean and tidy" clause of the agreement) to what was understood by Mobil, hence the disagreement, but what the courts have more or less held here is that if you want it as part of the contract you need to explicitly include it.
 
postscript: I am not a lawyer, I just have a passing fascination with legalese... 



Thank you.
Legasea Legend Member
Back to Top
Page  <123
Forum Jump
Forum Permissions View Drop Down


This page was generated in 0.727 seconds.

Fishing Reports Visit Reports

Rotorua Area Report - 01/06/23

Ngongataha stream fishing well  In between the large weather fronts that are still regularly hitting... Read More >

Canterbury Fishing Report - 01/06/23

Lures make easy work of fishing the depths  We have a bit of a mixed... Read More >

'Top of the South' Fishing Report - 01/06/23

Opportunities few and far between – make the most of them!  The weather certainly has... Read More >

Bay of Islands Fishing Report - 01/06/23

Some good snapper still around  The last fortnight has seen more weather windows than usual,... Read More >

Fishing bite times Fishing bite times

Major Bites

Minor Bites

Major Bites

Minor Bites