Search Results

1. Name suppression processes for victims of sexual violence [pdf, 493 KB]

   ...v Police (ibid) at p. 21. 7 newspaper publicity, which the learned District Court Judge referred to as going “close to the wire”, there would have been no possible basis to order suppression of name now. I suppose the outcome of this appeal is simply an illustration, or example, of how the concept of freedom of speech and openness of justice can, if stretched when not permitted, lead as is the case here to the press being denied later the right on behalf of, and as surrogat...

2. LCRO 55/2024 EFH and KFH v SP and NR (15 October 2024) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:6 6 Deliu v Hong [2012] NZHC 158, [2012] NZAR 209 at [39]–[41]. 7 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise...

3. LCRO 158/2023 QMY v WAN (30 June 2025) [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...is the nature and scope of the review? [49] The High Court has said of the process of review under Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act):2 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for that...

4. LCRO 138/2023 FK v LM (12 June 2025) [pdf, 230 KB]

   ...bias. 8 What is the nature and scope of the review? [32] The High Court has said this about the nature and scope of a review under the Act:2 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for th...

5. LCRO 38/2024 & 39/2024 SM v CV and CV v SM (13 August 2025) [pdf, 275 KB]

   ...would not have made his application for review if she had not made hers. 16 Nature and scope of review [81] The High Court has described a review by this Office in the following way:37 A review by the LCRO is neither a judicial review nor an appeal. Those seeking a review of a Committee determination are entitled to a review based on the LCRO’s own opinion rather than on deference to the view of the Committee. A review by the LCRO is informal, inquisitorial and robust. It i...

6. LCRO 81/2025 CB v AC (26 September 2025) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...[13] The High Court has said of the process of review under the Act that:6 6 Deliu v Hong [2012] NZHC 158, [2012] NZAR 209 at [39]–[41]. 4 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for that...

7. LCRO 47/2025 FI v SD (30 September 2025) [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...scope of review [28] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:1 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for that...

8. [2015] NZEmpC 133 Nisha v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 89 KB]

   ...application for leave has been made too late if the fixture is to be retained, as has been the defendant’s consistent stance including as recently as last week when it opposed an adjournment of the case when that issue was before the Court of Appeal. [13] Although the interlocutory application currently proposed by the defendant has been made too late so far as the fixture (now less than a week hence) is concerned, that is not to say that it cannot be renewed when the issue of cos...

9. [2014] NZEmpC 80 Tomo v Checkmate Precision Cutting [pdf, 65 KB]

   ...the threshold test in r 5.45(1) has been met and, if so, how the Court’s discretion should be exercised under r 5.45(2). [11] In exercising its broad discretion the Court must have regard to the overall justice of the case. As the Court of Appeal observed in McLachlan Ltd v MEL Network Ltd: 4 [15] The rule itself contemplates an order for security where the plaintiff will be unable to meet an adverse award of costs. That must be taken as contemplating also that an order for s...

10. CAC20003 v Cooper [2013] NZREADT 44 [pdf, 26 KB]

    ...the requirements of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 (or any successor legislation) and its regulations as the then Registrar of the Authority may direct. [19] Pursuant to s.113 of the Act, we record that any person affected by this decision may appeal against it to the High Court by virtue of s.116 of the Act. ______________________________ Judge P F Barber Chairperson ______________________________ Mr G Denley Member ______________________________ Mr...