Search Results

1. CAC 304 v Morris [2016] NZREADT 35 [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...misconduct brought by Complaints Assessment Committee 304. Charge one was dismissed. [2] The finding of misconduct was on the basis that the defendant wilfully or recklessly breached the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2009 in failing to disclose certain information to a trustee of the Maranatha Charitable Trust when he met with the trustees on 12 June 2012. Our Findings [3] In finding the defendant guilty of misconduct in respect of charge two,...

2. LA - Part 2 - Areas of Law Family [pdf, 710 KB]

   ...Pre-proceedings settlements Other Areas of Law Family PART 2 AREAS OF LAW – FAMILY – MOJ0052.2-MARCH14 PAGE 2 / 6 Family Court matters Current Year Previous Year 20–– 20–– 20–– Types of Family Court cases Adoption Act 1955 Care of Children Act 2004 Children, Young Persons and their Families Act 1989 Domestic Violence Act 1995 Family Proceedings Act 1980 Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act 1988 Property (Relationships) Act 1976 Family Protection Act...

3. BORA Contract and Commercial Law Bill [pdf, 146 KB]

   ...people enter into a contract for the sale and purchase of an item, they may be described as “associating” with each other for the purpose of the contract, but they would not be considered to have an “association”, or at least one deserving of protection, under the Bill of Rights Act. Whether s 19 at issue 8. Section 19(1) of the Bill of Rights Act affirms the right to be free from discrimination on the grounds of discrimination in the Human Rights Act 1993. The grounds of disc...

4. Canterbury Standards Committee v Sisson [2011] NZLCDT 35 [pdf, 143 KB]

   ...personally and professionally in her ability to carry out her work, as did the very sad circumstances concerning her daughter’s illness. However sympathy towards a practitioner’s circumstances cannot outweigh the obligation of the Tribunal to protect the public. A practitioner must be able to withstand personal pressures in order to continue properly performing his or her obligations to clients or alternatively have the ability to step aside from practice and ensure a clien...

5. [2021] NZEnvC 189 Bridesdale Farm Developments Ltd v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 3.6 MB]

   ...QLDC's planning witness, Mr Langman. However, counsel's closing submissions sought further changes to this modified relief. [19] One set of changes was proposed in response to concerns raised by Mr Langman that the LDSR zone is not designed to protect ONF /L landscape values (by contrast to the Rural zone). On that matter, BFDL's planning witness, Mr Jeffrey Brown, responded by proposing: 12 II 12 (a) a new Pol 7.2.1.7 as follows: Ensure that development and associated...

6. Pillay v New Zealand Transport Agency [2021] NZHRRT 13 [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...Pillay had imported at that time. Following inaction on that complaint by NZTA, Mr Pillay had filed a Disputes Tribunal claim against NZTA and others. That Disputes Tribunal claim was dismissed as the Disputes Tribunal found there was no duty of care owed by NZTA to Mr Pillay. [8] Having been alerted to Mr Pillay’s 2005 Disputes Tribunal hearing, NZTA emailed the Disputes Tribunal on 16 October 2015 and requested that Mr Pillay’s claim against NZTA be dismissed, for the same reaso...

7. [2021] NZIACDT 9 - SL v Mackintosh (5 May 2021) [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...the appropriate sanctions. BACKGROUND [4] The narrative leading to the complaint is set out in the earlier decision of the Tribunal and will only be briefly summarised here. [5] Ms Mackintosh, a licensed immigration adviser, is a director of Care Immigration Ltd, of Auckland. [6] The complainant, a national of India, had a work visa due to expire on 6 March 2019. Ms Mackintosh was engaged on 19 July 2018 to seek a further work visa. An application was duly filed by Ms Mack...

8. [2024] NZREADT 05 CAC v Pang (6 March 2024) [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...direct contact with his vendor client and inserted the client’s signature and initial on documents himself. He was found to have wilfully breached rr 5.1, 6.3, 9.6, 9.7, 12.2 and 12.3 of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012 (the Rules). This amounted to misconduct pursuant to s 73(c)(iii) of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 (the Act). [2] The Tribunal will now determine the penalty. BACKGROUND [3] The background narrative, as found by t...

9. [2024] NZEnvC 281 Save The Maitai Incorporated v Nelson City Council [pdf, 294 KB]

   ...[13] STM considers that the proposed changes in the JWS are an improvement, but they do not go far enough to address the issues identified by the court, in particular to ensure the provisions capture the fundamental concept of Te Mana o te Wai and protect freshwater values.5 [14] STM relies on the JWS with respect to the interaction between PC29 and PPC28. A decision has not yet been made in the PC29 process.6 STM’s preference is to ring fence the PPC28 provisions so that they a...

10. Carter v Tulip Holdings Ltd [pdf, 180 KB]

    ...19 LIABILITY FOR LOSS CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANTS’ DWELLING BEING A LEAKY BUILDING 23 The liability of the First respondent, THL, in contract 23 The liability of the Fifth respondent, Brown Day, in tort 27 • The standard of care 28 • Evidence of the standard 29 • The standard of plans and specifications generally 30 CLAIM NO.00692 – CARTER DETERMINATION.doc 3 • The standard of the plans and specifications of Brown Day 37 �...