Search Results

1. LCRO 194/2017 MA v NB, OC and PD (20 September 2019) [pdf, 344 KB]

   ...lawyers failed to competently represent her, Dr MA references a series of emails exchanges. It is her view that the emails corroborated her view both that the lawyers’ advice was inadequate, and that the lawyers were conflicted. [52] I have carefully considered those emails, the most relevant to Dr MA’s argument being an email forwarded to her on 4 November 2016. 14Jennings v Zilahi-Kiss (1972) 2 SASR 493 (SASC) at 512 cited with...

2. LCRO 105/2018 SW v NL (23 August 2019) [pdf, 292 KB]

   ...acting for Ms SW I make no adverse finding in respect of his contravention of those particular rules. (2) Was Mr NL prevented from acting for both Mr RA and Ms SW? (a) Acting for more than 1 client – r 6.1 [108] Consistent with the consumer protection purposes of the Act and lawyers’ fundamental obligation to protect clients’ interests, r 6 requires that: 14 [i]n acting for a client, a lawyer must, within the bounds of the law and [the rules], protect and promote the intere...

3. LL v U Ltd [2024] NZDT 306 (24 April 2024) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...to have warned LL as soon as they knew of the scam. 28. Further, it is relevant that the contractual terms and conditions go to some lengths to explain that U Ltd is not responsible for the things that are beyond their control. 29. U Ltd is careful in its terms and conditions to advise purchasers about their buyer protection scheme. 30. There is no contractual obligation that U Ltd would take responsibility in such situations. 31. The scam was clearly an example of condition...

4. LCRO 126-2017 PC v The Committee [pdf, 281 KB]

   ...[7] This review concerns whether Mr PC ought to have done so, and whether by doing so he failed to meet the requirements of s 164A LTA, and as a consequence contravened r 2.5 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules). Own motion investigation [8] At its meeting on 8 November 2016, the Committee resolved to commence an own motion investigation into Mr PC’s conduct pursuant to s 130(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2...

5. BORA - APEC 2021 Bill [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...major international event of significant scale and complexity. Leaders from up to 21 APEC economies will be in New Zealand. 7. The exercise of the discretionary powers granted under the Bill are likely to result in significant limitations on some protected rights and freedoms, particularly freedom of movement. However, we consider these limits can be justified in a free and democratic society. This is largely on the basis that: a. there is a clear and pressing need for security at an...

6. Kaupapa Maori Report [pdf, 1.7 MB]

   ...crime and safety experiences ........................................................................ 13 Figure 5 Māori children hospitalisation rates per 100,000 .................................................... 14 Figure 6 Māori children in care ............................................................................................... 14 Figure 7 Overview of ISR ......................................................................................................... 19...

7. Tai Rāwahiti v Tauranga - Tekumi A21A (2009) 228 Aotea MB 148 (228 AOT 148) [pdf, 442 KB]

   ...proper notice to the trust's auditor should be given. It would be easy for uninformed beneficiaries to surmise that something untoward was in train where no proper paper trail of transactions has been maintained. It is for the trustees' own protection that such practices need to be abandoned. Bankruptcy [46] Documents were filed highlighting the bankruptcy ofMr Phillips in 2005. Mrs Quinn has confirmed to the case manager that Mr Phillips bankruptcy was discharged in early...

8. Tremain Real Estate (2012) Limited and Cox v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 403) and Ly [2018] NZREADT 54 [pdf, 289 KB]

   ...is the existing appraised value from the agent. [40] The Tribunal said further:9 … Parliament could not have intended that, for a provisional value, the highest figure mentioned should be used as, obviously that deprives the vendor of the protection to be given under s 134. That is simply common sense. Application to recall [41] The Authority applied to the Tribunal to recall its decision. It submitted that the Tribunal had inadvertently referred to the existing appraised v...

9. NJUM v Vole [2020] NZIACDT 5 (29 January 2020) [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...Residence declined [17] On 22 June 2016, Immigration New Zealand declined the complainant’s application for residence. It was not satisfied that the partnership was genuine and stable. Mr Vole appealed the decision to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal, on behalf of the complainant. [18] The complainant and Mr Vole entered into a further agreement on 25 July 2016 covering representation for the appeal. The fee was $4,140. [19] The complainant and Mr Vole entered into a...

10. 2017 Youth Court Media Protocol [pdf, 166 KB]

    ...suppression of these details as they are automatically suppressed. A Judge can never approve publication of these details. These details include: a. The name of the child or young person or the names of the parents or guardians or any person having care of the child or young person. b. The name of any school the child or young person is or was attending. c. Any other name or particulars likely to lead to the identification of the child or young person or of any school that the...