14850 items matching your search terms
...that a fine of $500 would be the appropriate penalty for Ms Brooker. We order, therefore, that she pay the sum of $500 by way of a fine. [16] We draw the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Real Estate Agents Act which provides for the right of appeal to the High Court. 5 DATED at AUCKLAND this 11th day of June 2012 ______________________________ Mr G Denley Member ______________________________ Mr J Gaukrodger Member
...the commencement of the 2008 Act on 17 November 2009 s 172 of the 2008 Act applies and we cannot make such an order, see CAC v Dodd (above) at para 65. [29] In accordance with s 113 of the Act the Tribunal advises the parties of the right to appeal this decision to the High Court pursuant to s 116 of the Act. DATED at WELLINGTON this 21 st day of April 2011 ______________________________ Judge Michael Hobbs Chairman ______________________________ J Robson Me...
...corruption in NZLS”. [6] Mr Clancy for the Standards Committee opposed the request for adjournment. He submitted that the practitioner had been aware of the Tribunal’s decision since December 2013 and thus had time to exercise his right to appeal the decision and had not done so. He said that there was no prejudice to the practitioner in declining the request, because the issue of possible strike-off had been extant since May 2014 at a time when Mr Mabey,QC was representing...
...approval that Mr Clews has subsequently apologised in writing to this practitioner. [10] In terms of disciplinary history we note there was one finding of unsatisfactory conduct which related to the manner in which Mr Clews conducted the trial, the appeal from which led (indirectly) to these two charges. Thus, this is a somewhat unusual situation in that there is a nexus between these charges and the only other adverse finding against the practitioner. We consider that does reduce...
...needed in order to complete my review. Considerations 3 [10] In undertaking this review I am aware that the Practitioner was struck off the Roll of Solicitors and Barristers on [date] in relation to another matter. The Practitioner’s appeal of that decision was unsuccessful. The decision now under review preceded the above decision. However, as at the time of the review the Practitioner was no longer practising as a lawyer. [11] However, this is not a factor that sh...
...concerning GE. The Committee found that “this refusal was in all the circumstances capable of being considered a device to enable (the Practitioner) to take instructions from [GE] in relation to his (locally known to be more complex and lucrative appeal) matter instead.” [13] The Standards Committee was of the view that Practitioner‟s conduct was capable of reaching the threshold of „misconduct‟ under Section 7 (1)(a)(i) of the Act, and for this reason decided that the...
SUMMARY Case: White & Anor v Rodney District Council & Anor File No: TRI 2007-100-000064/ DBH 01814 Court: WHT Adjudicator: K Kilgour Date of Decision: 4 March 2009 Background This determination is based on a claim filed by the claimants filed against the Rodney District Council (Council) and Mr and Mrs Kerkins (Kerkins) as vendors and project managers/developers/head-contractors of the subject dwelling. However due to the passing away of Mr Kerkins, Mrs Kerkins
...6. Sex offenders liable to registration are defined in the Bill as those who: (i) On the day the Bill comes into force, are serving a sentence in respect of an offence under sections 128 to 144C of the Crimes Act (including individuals who are appealing their convictions) or are on parole or have been found not guilty of a sexual offence by reason of insanity and are still being held under the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1992; and ii) On or after the date o...
...We understand that the rationale for including provisions in the SOP that override the Bill of Rights Act is to avoid the risk that certain regulations or orders in council will be struck down as being ultra vires as a consequence of the Court of Appeal decision in Drew v Attorney General [2002] 1 NZLR 58. 15. However, we note the scope of section 49 of the SOP (see paragraph 8 above), and the range of factors the Minister must have regard to before making recommendations. We consider th...
...applicant to meet the ownership criteria. 1 “Setting Apart Land as a Māori Reservation” (14 July 1983) 101 New Zealand Gazette 2163 at 2181 2 [2015] Māori Appellate Court MB 365 (2015 APPEAL 365) 377 Aotea MB 284 [33] Whatever process is adopted it is unnecessarily convoluted. It is highly unlikely in our view, that the drafters of the legislation had it in mind that beneficiaries of whānau trusts would be ineli...