Search Results

1. LT v SH [2019] NZIACDT 57 (7 August 2019) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...following provisions of the Code: General 1. A licensed immigration adviser must be honest, professional, diligent and respectful and conduct themselves with due care and in a timely manner. Futile immigration matters 9. If a proposed application, appeal, request or claim is futile, grossly unfounded, or has little or no hope of success, a licensed immigration adviser must: a. advise the client in writing that, in the adviser’s opinion, the immigration matter is futile, grossly...

2. CAC 409 v Brady [2019] NZREADT 21 (23 May 2019) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...the Authority within 20 working days of the date of this decision. [2019] NZREADT 21 - Ball & Brady - publishing [56] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Act, which sets out the right of appeal to the High Court. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. ___________________ Hon P J Andrews Chairperson ____________________ Ms N Dangen Member _________...

3. SM v ML LCRO 79 / 2011 (22 November 2012) [pdf, 130 KB]

   ...to be a reference to section 138(1)(f) of the Act which provides that a Standards Committee may determine to take no further action if, in the opinion of the Standards Committee “there is in all the circumstances an adequate remedy or right of appeal, other than the right to petition the House of Representatives or to make a complaint to an Ombudsman, that it would be reasonable for the person aggrieved to exercise.” [31] However, SM’s complaint cannot be determined on these g...

4. [2023] NZIACDT 15 - TC v MacLeod (1 May 2023) [pdf, 136 KB]

   ...residence application for the complainant and his family. It incorporated a business plan (BP). Immigration New Zealand (Immigration NZ) declined the residence visa on 29 September 2016 as it was not satisfied the business was trading profitably. An appeal to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal was declined on 13 July 2017. [8] On 17 January 2019, a second entrepreneur residence application was filed on behalf of the complainant and his family. Immigration NZ sent a letter...

5. Gilbert - Horahora 1A3B (2017) 158 Taitokerau MB 69 (18 TTK 69) [pdf, 839 KB]

   ...addition, the Court must be satisfied that: 5 2 Sione – Te Hapua 24 (2000) 4 Taitokerau Appellate MB 275 (4 APWH 275) at 276; Rudolph v Reti – Otetao B3A2 [2011] Maori Appellate Court MB 143 (2011 APPEAL 143). 3 McCarthy – Utakura No. 9 (2008) 124 Whangarei MB 84 (124 WH 84). 4 Te Ture Whenua Māori Act, s 329(1). 5 Te Ture Whenua Māori Act, s 329(2). 158 Taitokerau MB 81 (a) The owners have had sufficient notice and o...

6. LCRO 252/2016 MY on behalf of BAT Ltd (12 March 2019) [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...new matter and will not be addressed on review. [65] Mr MY may feel aggrieved that each of the matters raised by him has not been specifically discussed or reasons provided for rejecting them. In this regard, reference is made to the Court of Appeal decision R v Nakhla (no 2) where the court said:15 As to the complaints in the motion that the Court did not deal with certain submissions and attributed to counsel a submission he did not make it may be observed that a belief on the pa...

7. Raukawa v Lux - Opape 3A No 1E (2019) 210 Waiāriki MB 114 (210 WAR 114) [pdf, 406 KB]

   ...every trust constituted under this Part of this Act the Court shall appoint 1 or more responsible trustees, and may appoint 1 or more advisory trustees and 1 or more custodian trustees. [10] In the leading case Clarke v Karaitiana the Court of Appeal held:4 [51] The touchstone is s 222(2) itself. In appointing a trustee, the Court is obliged to have regard to the ability, experience and knowledge of the individual concerned. In considering those issues, the Court will no doubt have...

8. AZ v YX LCRO 175 / 2010 (25 March 2011) [pdf, 146 KB]

   ...revised estimate figures”. [83] An estimate is a representation that costs will be in the vicinity of a given sum and all due care must be exercised when providing same. See J and J Abrams Ltd v Ancliffe [1978] 2 NZLR 420. [84] The Court of Appeal has also made some pertinent comments concerning estimates in Kirk v Vallant Hooker & Partners [2002] NZLR 156 at para 49. In that case the Court stated:- 14 “Second, the question of loss or otherwise due to excess over...

9. Tidmarsh v Glover [pdf, 271 KB]

   ...the work himself, he had taken upon himself a far greater responsibility than Mr Glover in this present case which means the likelihood of Mr Glover being liable in tort is significantly less than Mr Castelein in Willis . [141] Willis was an appeal from the District Court decision of Judge Lawson and involved a vendor, Castelein, who had personally undertaken building and renovation work on the property prior to the sale to Willis. Castelein was not a professional builder but h...

10. Body Corporate 85927, 38 Roxborough St v Wellington City Council [2010] NZWHT Wellington 12 [pdf, 203 KB]

    ...(Sunset Terraces)3 where Heath J held that if the building could be built by a reasonable builder who would have access to the manufacturers‟ specifications no greater detail would be required to achieve a workmanlike result. This was upheld on appeal in Sunset Terraces4 where Baragwanath J said: [121] I agree with the Judge. No purpose would be served by requiring a designer to incur the cost of providing detail not reasonably necessary for the task. There being no carelessn...