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. 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...

3. 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...

4. Auckland Standards Committee 5 v Moody [2016] NZLCDT 23 [pdf, 33 KB]

   ...inspection of the file is to be subject to the approval of the Chair. The decision itself omits reference to such matters and therefore may be published in full. Medical Evidence [11] Dr Casey is a consultant psychiatrist specialising in old age care and is a practitioner of considerable experience. Dr Casey had examined Mr Moody in October 2014, twice in late 2015 and twice in early 2016. She diagnosed him as suffering from frontotemporal dementia. Dr Casey’s evidence is th...

5. [2022] NZEmpC 126 Henderson Travels Ltd v Kaur [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...123(1)(b) and 128 of the Act.2 [3] Henderson Travels was also ordered to reimburse Ms Kaur $7,268.10 for underpaid wages and $267.75 for working on a public holiday. Holiday pay at eight per cent was added. [4] The Authority found that the Wages Protection Act 1983 was breached by Henderson Travels because it obtained a premium from Ms Kaur of $860. The company was ordered to repay her. [5] In addition to those sums a penalty of $12,000 was imposed on Henderson Travels...

6. [2021] NZREADT 39 - Lee (29 July 2021) [pdf, 243 KB]

   ...for his non-appearance. The Tribunal therefore determined the charges by way of formal proof. A copy of the decision was provided to Mr Lee. Penalty principles [10] The principal purpose of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 is to “promote and protect the interests of consumers in respect of transactions that relate to real estate and to promote public confidence in the performance of real estate agency work.2 The Act achieves these purposes by regulating agents, branch managers,...

7. Twigley v New Zealand Law Society [2025] NZLCDT 5 (28 January 2025) [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...of New South Wales v Foreman [1994] 34 NSWLR 408, 419, per Kirby P. 3 Issue [6] The issue for the Tribunal was whether the structure for re-entry into legal practice being put forward for consideration by Mr Twigley was sufficient to protect the public (and the profession’s reputation) from risk of future lapses in Mr Twigley’s judgement; and ensure adherence to his professional obligations. And, centrally, did we assess Mr Twigley to be a fit and proper person to p...

8. 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...

9. [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...

10. [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...