Search Results

1. Johnston & Vining Realty Group Ltd v CAC 20002 & Reid [2013] NZREADT 82 [pdf, 37 KB]

   ...finding of unsatisfactory conduct against the applicant. (ii) the applicant was not found to have acted in bad faith; rather acted very responsibly towards the vendor in this case (refer paragraph [38] of the Tribunal’s decision). Accordingly, protection of the public interest will not be jeopardised by non-publication of the applicant’s name. (iii) the Tribunal imposed an order for costs rather than the more punitive order of a fine against the applicant and Mr Johnston; and (i...

2. [2025] NZIACDT 11 - INZ v Li (14 February 2025) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...immigration advice, and to enhance the reputation of New Zealand as a migration destination, by providing for the regulation of persons who give immigration advice. [21] The focus of professional disciplinary proceedings is not punishment, but the protection of the public:4 …It is well established that professional disciplinary proceedings are civil and not criminal in nature. That is because the purpose of statutory disciplinary proceedings for various occupations is not to punish...

3. [2025] NZIACDT 10 – INZ v Li (14 February 2025) [pdf, 203 KB]

   ...directly, enabling immigration fraud to occur. While the breaches share one underlying issue, a lack of direct contact, they occurred consistently from the time Ms Li was first engaged until the very end of her services. There was also a failure to protect and appropriately handle personal and confidential information entrusted to her. The breaches can be considered moderately serious. [12] This is Ms Li’s first appearance before the Tribunal, albeit alongside a complaint fro...

4. National Standards Committee 2 v Tennet [2025] NZLCDT 28 (16 June 2025) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...proportionately, taking guidance from relevant precedents. Among appropriate options, the lesser sanction should be imposed. The orders should serve the purposes of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (Act) “to advance the public interest (which include “protection of the public”), to maintain professional standards, to impose sanctions on a practitioner for breach of his/her duties, and to provide scope for rehabilitation in appropriate cases.”1 [4] And:2 [2] To address thi...

5. McDonald and Brummer v New Zealand Law Society [2012] NZLCDT 3 [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...exercise of the discretion. (a) The need to protect both the public and the standing of the profession [17] In this case that consideration needs to be divided into two parts. [18] The New Zealand Law Society considered that there was need for protection of the public. That submission appeared to be advanced on the basis that the offending was serious and prolonged. It is conceded however that the employment arrangements proposed would not allow Mr Hancock any access to the tr...

6. BORA Courts and Criminal Matters Bill [pdf, 31 KB]

   ...Act. The release of this advice should not be taken to indicate that the Attorney-General agrees with all aspects of it, nor does its release constitute a general waiver of legal professional privilege in respect of this or any other matter. Whilst care has been taken to ensure that this document is an accurate reproduction of the advice provided to the Attorney-General, neither the Ministry of Justice nor the Crown Law Office accepts any liability for any errors or omissions....

7. BORA Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) - justice items [pdf, 212 KB]

   ...of legislation, which are either administered by the Ministry of Justice or affect legislation administered, or powers and functions performed, by the Ministry: • Bail Act 2000 • Harassment Act 1997 • Oaths and Declarations Act 1957 • Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act 1988 • Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 • Sentencing Act 2002 • Victims’ Orders Against Violent Offenders Act 2014 6. Crown Law considers that, apart from the two exceptions considered f...

8. BORA Ngati Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 356 KB]

   ...between individuals. 9. Clause 23(3) of the Bill excludes damages as a remedy for any failure of the Crown to comply with a protocol under Part 2. This clause affects the substantive law and does not in my view fall within the ambit of s 27(3), which protects procedural rights. Accordingly, clause 23(3) of the Bill is consistent with s 27(3) of the Bill of Rights. Fergus Sinclair Crown Counsel DDI: (04) 494-5630 Fax: (04) 494-5675 Email: fergus.sinclair @crownlaw.govt.nz Footno...

9. BORA Te Roroa Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 350 KB]

   ...between individuals. 8. Clause 21(3) of the Bill excludes damages as a remedy for any failure of the Crown to comply with a protocol under Part 2. This clause affects the substantive law and does not in my view fall within the ambit of s 27(3), that protects procedural rights. Accordingly, clause 21(3) of the Bill is consistent with s 27(3) of the Bill of Rights. Yours sincerely Jane Foster Associate Crown Counsel 1 See our advice in respect of the Ngati Mutunga Settlement (dated...

10. 2022-03-22 Summary of Evidence of Jana Davis on behalf of the ORC, Kāi Tahu ki Otago and Ngāi Tahu ki Murihiku - 21 March 2022 [pdf, 111 KB]

    ...Tahu have a deep and enduring connection with wai māori and the plants and animals it supports, as described by Mr Ellison and Mr Whaanga in their evidence. That connection gives rise to both rakatirataka rights and kaitiakitaka obligations to protect the mauri of all water bodies. 2 The health of our wai plays an important role in the balance of eco- systems and the abundance and resilience of mahika kai. We understand that what occurs in the headwaters affects all life all the...