Search Results

1. LCRO 68/2017 GM v BN (6 July 2017) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...agreement was at an end and requested the return of the deposit. (b) By not returning the deposit Mr BN was in breach of his undertaking to do so which is a contravention of rule 10.3.2 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care Rules) 2008 (the rules) that concerns funds held by a lawyer as stakeholder. Standards Committee decision [6] The Standards Committee delivered its decision on 3 March 2017. [7] The Standards Committee determined, pursuant to s 1...

2. NQ & SS v QG & Ors [2024] NZDT 83 (9 January 2024) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...acknowledgement (on behalf of E Ltd), and the Tribunal’s record of their discussion, that: a. this work is covered by s28 CGA and SS and NQ are entitled to the benefits of the guarantee in s28 that these services were done with reasonable care and skill; and b. if any failure of that guarantee as to reasonable care and skill were to occur, SS and NQ are entitled to enforce remedies available to them under s32 CGA; and c. E Ltd would, if requested by SS and NQ, directly pr...

3. R. Singh v Kumar [2016] NZIACDT 14 (23 March 2016) [pdf, 121 KB]

   ...complainant wished to proceed. [16.2] Mr Kumar breached clauses 1.1(a), 1.1(b) and 3(f) of the Licensed Immigration Advisers Code of Conduct 2010 (the 2010 Code). The provisions required him to perform services and carry out instructions with due care, diligence, and professionalism, and confirm in writing the details of material discussions. The circumstances were: [16.2.1] When Mr Kumar received the letter of 1 February 2013 from Immigration New Zealand, expressing concerns about the...

4. Water Services Entities Bill [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...otherwise. 19. There are two limbs to the section 21 right. First, section 21 is applicable only in respect of those activities that constitute a “search or seizure”. Secondly, where certain actions do constitute a search or seizure, section 21 protects only against those searches or seizures that are “unreasonable” in the circumstances. 20. We consider that the power to compel information in these circumstances constitutes a search for the purposes of s 21 of the Bill of Rig...

5. LCRO 359/2013 SW v LM [pdf, 212 KB]

   ...its own view of the complaint independent of the findings of any other court or tribunal.3 Mr SW’s complaints [8] Mr SW’s complaints were that Mr LM was in breach of r 13.8 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules (the Rules) and that he had attacked Mr SW’s reputation without good cause. Mr SW said:4 … I am of the view that he lacked sufficient objectivity as counsel and his submissions were more akin to grandstanding to provoke media...

6. Auckland Standards Committee 4 of the New Zealand Law Society v Thoman [2011] NZLCDT 8 [pdf, 136 KB]

   ...instructing solicitor in evidence in relation to these seven clients, nor is there a single bill of costs. Only one client managed to retrieve his passport, others lost valuable documents such as marriage certificates which they had entrusted to her care, or as it turns out lack of care. [7] The Society submits that this behaviour to clients is totally unacceptable to the profession as a whole and seeks that their disapproval be marked by the most serious sanction, striking off t...

7. CAC20004 v Li & Ors [2015] NZREADT 6 [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...behalf of Ms Wang has been dismissed. We now deal with the issue of penalty. 2 General principles on penalty [3] It is settled law that penalty decisions of disciplinary tribunals should emphasise the maintenance of high standards and the protection of the public through specific and general deterrence. While this may result in orders having a punitive effect, this is not their purpose: Z v CAC [2009] 1 NZLR 1; CAC v Walker [2011] NZREADT 4. [4] The Real Estate Agents Act...

8. UW v NG LCRO 152/2012 (27 October 2015) [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...to Mr and Mrs AB being brought to his office. [11] Mr NG met with Mr and Mrs AB in the foyer of his office and went through the terms of the offer in some detail. 7 (a) she was concerned about the burden placed upon her husband providing care for her on his own; and He says he discussed the reasons for Mr and Mrs AB selling, and that Mrs AB explained: (b) the detrimental impact this burden would have on his health; and (c) their daughter Ms OL was prepared to look afte...

9. LCRO 114/2018 CL v [City] Standards Committee [X] (17 May 2019) [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...Standards Committee X] (the Committee) that she had breached a number of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Trust Account) Regulations 2008 (the Trust Account regulations) and rr 3.41 and 11.32 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules). [2] The Committee made findings of unsatisfactory conduct against Ms [CL] and ordered her to take “appropriate advice from [a] trust account consultant approved by the Committee”.3 [3] The Committee a...

10. [2017] NZEmpC 84 The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development v Tuilaepa [pdf, 205 KB]

    ...accepted permanent employment in 2004. A residential social worker provides 1 Tuilaepa v The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development [2016] NZERA Auckland 176. professional care and protection for children and young persons remanded into the custody of the Chief Executive of the Ministry or who are sentenced to supervision. 2 [3] Mr Tuilaepa was dismissed from his employment on 20 October 2015 for serious mi...