Search Results

1. Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Fendall [2018] NZLCDT 32 [pdf, 119 KB]

   THERE IS AN ORDER MADE PURSUANT TO S 240 LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS ACT 2006 FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF MEDICAL DETAILS. PLEASE SEE ORDER 5 ON PAGE 10 FOR FULL SUPPRESSION DETAILS. NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2018] NZLCDT 32 LCDT 036/17 UNDER The Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 BETWEEN AUCKLAND STANDARDS COMMITTEE 1 OF THE NEW ZEALAND LAW SOCIETY Applicant AND ROBYN PHILIPPA JOY FENDALL Respondent C...

2. Aramatua Trust v Proctor - Nuhaka 2C2X (2020) 99 Tairawhiti MB 106 (99 TRW 106) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...right of a fee simple holding to be able to partake of the fruits of the land so if that affects that company that is not my fault, I don’t wish to affect them. And I do wish to stay on that land and this is 99 Tairawhiti MB 111 my best plea to your court so that I may stay there and partake of the fruits. Is anybody there and can you still hear me? The Court: Yes, we heard all that, thank you. Anything further? M Proctor: Yes, Your Honour. I don’t wish for you to ma...

3. [2010] NZEmpC 84 Secretary for Justice v Dodd [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...nephew’s records on CMS formed the basis of the lesser of the two findings of misconduct in employment that led to Ms Dodd’s dismissal. She accepts that doing so was wrong. [23] There was evidently some uncertainty about the nephew’s intended pleas to the charges he faced. At an early stage of the prosecution, the complainant made a victim impact statement (VIS) some of the substance of which the nephew disputed, regarded as unduly harsh, and which he was advised could well...

4. OX v XX Standards Committee LCRO 180/2015 (4 October 2016) [pdf, 456 KB]

   ...over several months when he took further instructions and provided advice, prior to the two weeks before the trial was due to commence. As I understand it, Mr OX had by then provided written advice to his client in relation to the charges, and on plea. Mr OX says he met with his client over the first of the two weeks before trial, and took further detailed instructions. He says his ability to take further instructions was compromised by his client being in custody for the final w...

5. Te Korowai Tiaki o Te Hauauru Incorporated v Te Rūnanga o Ngati Tama Trust - Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Tama Trust (2020) 425 Aotea MB 203 (425 AOT 203) [pdf, 309 KB]

   ...The Rūnanga made two main points in mitigation. First, because the original trustees of the Rūnanga were the generally recognised kaumātua of Ngāti Tama, it was not necessary to establish the committee. While this may have been the case, the plea misses the point. The purpose of the committee is to advise the Rūnanga trustees on various issues, including 425 Aotea MB 222 on whakapapa and membership.31 To provide that advice, the committee must be independent from th...

6. Z v Secretary for Justice [2023] NZRA 001 (28 March 2023) [pdf, 306 KB]

   ...responsibility for all tactical and strategic advice given to the client in that proceeding, that is likely to be a factor assisting the applicant. [65] Does that mean that a PAL 3 applicant may rely solely on four PAL 3 cases where early guilty pleas were entered, and the applicant was not required to take any significant steps other than make submissions on sentence? While each case must be judged on its own merits, I doubt that such an application could succeed – in a part...

7. BORA Criminal Procedure Bill [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...“No one who has been finally acquitted or convicted of, or pardoned for, an offence should be tried or punished for it again.” 5. It affirms the rule against double jeopardy already given effect to in ss 357 to 359 Crimes Act 1961 (relating to pleas of previous acquittal and previous conviction). 6. The double jeopardy rule is of great significance and importance.1 It is seen as a fundamental building block of the criminal justice process and a basic safeguard of civil liberty in...

8. CAC20005 v Morton-Jones [2015] NZREADT 71 [pdf, 141 KB]

   ...NZREADT 48 the licensee failed to disclose, on four occasions, that his niece was the purchaser (or vendor) in property transactions he acted on. He then lied to the Committee investigating his conduct. In light of the licensee’s very early guilty plea and his cooperation with the Authority, we were persuaded not to cancel Mr Li’s licence, but imposed a suspension of close to the maximum (17 months from a starting point of 24) and fined him $10,000. [19] As noted in the opening sub...

9. Auckland Standards Committee v Hylan [2014] NZLCDT 31 [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...not consider that the practitioner poses a risk to the public or that any element of dishonesty in the sense of personal gain, or more than a lapse in judgment when pressed by an overwrought client existed. He will need to learn to withstand the pleas of clients in upholding his own and his profession’s ethical standards in future. 9 [38] We take account of the practitioner’s fairly minimal financial circumstances in awarding costs against him and in respect of the per...

10. CAC 20005 v Drever [2014] NZREADT 101 [pdf, 40 KB]

    ...the basis of the summary of facts set out above as part of the amended charge. [4] We had absorbed the quite detailed briefs of the proposed witnesses for each party, and the detailed and helpful opening submissions, filed prior to the change in plea. The initial charges had relied on s.73(a) of the Act rather than s.73(b) as now pleaded. [5] Accordingly, the hearing before us focused on penalty. The Stance of the Prosecution [6] The complainant, Ms J Hedgman, is the proprietor...