Search Results

1. McKinney v Cassidy [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...upset and loss of enjoyment as a result of the above defects, in the amount of $20,000.00. 4.8 The claims against Mr Cassidy are in tort and based on allegations of negligence. The Owners say that Mr Cassidy owed them a non-delegable duty of care to ensure that all building work was carried out in compliance with the building regulations. They claim that he breached that duty by failing to carry out, or have carried out, the building work in a compliant manner. 4.9 The cla...

2. LCRO 183/2021 WB v XD (22 July 2022) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...Standards Committee identified the focus of its investigation as being an inquiry as to whether, in acting for Mr WB, Mr XD had failed to act competently and in a timely manner consistent with the terms of the retainer and the duty to take reasonable care, in accordance with rule 3 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules). [19] The Standards Committee delivered its decision on 4 November 2021. [20] The Committee determined, pursua...

3. LCRO 261/2016 TJ v DM and ZP (26 September 2019) [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...a complaint submission as extensive as that filed by Ms TJ, that a degree of distillation of the material is necessary in order to ensure that the issues can be effectively and efficiently addressed. [20] The Committee noted that it had given careful consideration to all of the issues raised by Ms TJ in her complaints and indicated that it did not consider it necessary to respond to all of the matters raised. The Committee cited case authority to support its position.1 [21] Ms...

4. McMeeken and Anor v CAC306 & Ors [2015] NZREADT 79 [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...the conduct in question; and [e] Whether the Committee’s decisions further the purposes of the Act. The Law on Disclosure [41] There is a clear and express disclosure obligation in the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012 for the benefit of both vendor clients (described in the Rules as ‘clients’) and purchasers (described in the Rules as ‘customers’). This is found at Rule 6.4 which states: “A licensee must not mislead a customer or...

5. LCRO 43/2020 SL v DN (29 September 2021) [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...identifying details of the parties in this decision have been anonymised Introduction [1] Mr SL has applied for a review of the determination by [Area] Standards Committee [X] that he had breached rr 6.1, 6.1.2 and 6.1.3 of the Conduct and Client Care Rules.1 The Committee made a finding of unsatisfactory conduct against Mr SL pursuant to s 12(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006. Background2 [2] Mr DN was the owner of the rear unit of a three-unit development. Title...

6. HNL v SEC [2013] NZIACDT 11 (19 March 2013) [pdf, 146 KB]

   ...required to complete the application for a work permit. [17] Mr SEC explained his approach to this professional engagement and his entitlement to fees in these terms: “In order to maintain a professional standard of service it is necessary to protect the intellectual property which is my knowledge and experience of Immigration Law and Practice. It is also necessary to keep clients fully informed of the process(es) required for their application but ensure that clients do not withdra...

7. [2024] NZIACDT 14 – SC v Murthy (23 April 2024) [pdf, 166 KB]

   ...the complainant, prior to being engaged. 5. Failing to provide the Authority with a complete client file and confirm material discussions in writing. Breaches of the Code 6. Failing to conduct herself with professionalism, diligence and due care in failing to request the complainant’s previous immigration records and therefore failing to recognise he could not submit another application, in breach of cl 1. 7. Failing to recognise that the complainant’s application was like...

8. BG v YQ LCRO 161 / 2010 (4 April 2011) [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...these other matrimonial matters. 2 [4] The Standards Committee file that was obtained for the review contained copies of numerous exchanges between Ms BH and the Practitioner concerning relationship property and other matters involving the care of children, and also the drafting of a Section 21 agreement. The nature of the letters suggest that that the relationship break up was not amicable. [5] The Applicant eventually filed complaints against the Practitioner. She all...

9. BORA Wills Bill [pdf, 381 KB]

   ...Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill in May 2003) an age restriction has been justified in terms of section 5 of the BORA as a reasonable limit prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. In other contexts (eg the Care of Children Bill in May 2003), we have concluded that they cannot. 8. This Bill is concerned with the age at which the law should recognise the capacity of a person to do a testamentary action. This is a significant life decision that conce...

10. SN & FN v U Ltd [2022] NZDT 260 (21 December 2022) [pdf, 121 KB]

    ...being the $12,347.70 outstanding amount invoiced for the roofing work (slightly less than the quoted amount) and the rest of the claimed amount being interest. 6. The issues to be determined are: • Did U Ltd provide its service with reasonable care and skill and is the product of its service fit for purpose? • What remedy, if any, is available to SN and FN? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 5 • What are the relevant terms and conditions of the contract with respect to...