Search Results

1. NZHC 349 28 February 2013 Therese Anne Sisson v The Standards Committee [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...available to the Tribunal. Under both the old and new Acts the test is whether by reason of misconduct someone is shown to be not a fit and proper person to be a practitioner. [45] It is well recognised that the jurisdiction of the Tribunal is protective. That is, there is a public interest in the maintenance of high standards given that practitioners must be trustworthy; competent to uphold the ethical obligations to which they are subject. As the Master of the Rolls, Sir Thomas...

2. VAB v Corrections [2022] NZHRRT 31 [pdf, 215 KB]

   ...imminent threat to the safety of the plaintiff’s daughter and that “Ms Bakker had significant concerns regarding the immediate safety of the plaintiff’s daughter […] exacerbated by the fact that there was no independent person who could give protective support”. [30] However, the plaintiff submitted there was no evidence of a serious and imminent threat and that if Ms Bakker did believe there was a serious and imminent threat the disclosure should have been made to CYFS or th...

3. [2019] NZEnvC 208 Aratiatia Livestock Limited v Southland Regional Council [pdf, 11 MB]

   ...for Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga J G A Winchester and S K Lennon for Waihopai R0naka, Hokonui R0naka, Te R0nanga o Awarua, Te R0nanga o Oraka Aparima (collectively Nga R0nanga) and Te R0nanga o Ngai Tahu S R Gepp for Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Incorporated R Donnelly for Waiau Rivercare Group VJ Hamm for Ballance Agri-Nutrients Limited M R G Christensen for Ravensdown Limited Date of Decision: 20 December 2019 Date of Issue: 20 December 2019...

4. LCRO 35/2024 UX v RT (19 September 2024) [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...body corporate’s lawyers to act for them. 5 [24] The couple made several further requests to the respondent for assistance in 2015. On each occasion, the respondent declined to accept instructions, on the basis that the Firm’s standard of care in acting on the purchase was potentially at issue. [25] I have no information as to the course of events relating to the weathertightness issue after that but I infer, from the extremity of expression by the applicant of the effects...

5. Rec-Recap-2023-Q3-FINAL.pdf [pdf, 790 KB]

   .................................................................... 25 Langley [2023] NZCorC 113 (27 September 2023) ................................................................ 26 Mr X and Mr Y [2023] NZCorC 95 (3 August 2023) ................................................................ 32 Medical Care ............................................................................................................................ 34 Cresswell [2023] NZCorC 101 (21 August 2023) ..........

6. [2024] NZEnvC 185 Transpower New Zealand Limited v Central Hawkes Bay District Council [pdf, 5.7 MB]

   ...safe level (e.g. activities include erosion, sediment and flood control, weed control, access requirements, maintenance of plant, machinery or structures and monitoring of operations). MAINTENANCE (OF A HERITAGE ITEM) means regular and ongoing protective care of a place to prevent deterioration and to retain its values. Maintenance excludes alterations, additions, restoration, or reconstruction. MAJOR HAZARDOUS FACILITY (a) any facility which involves one or more of the followi...

7. LCRO 39/2019 Yuri Lukas v BW and CV (29 November 2019) [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...retainer. Mr Lukas failed to keep Mr BW and Dr CV updated about what was happening with their case, in particular, the delays caused by INZ needing further information. The Committee was left with the impression that Mr Lukas’ approach to client care and file management is particularly laissez-faire. [28] The Standards Committee considered that, taken together, Mr Lukas’ failings in relation to these three issues demonstrated an overall lack of care and represented conduct that fa...

8. LCRO 186/2019 ZU v FD (15 June 2021) [pdf, 246 KB]

   ...[Area] Standards Committee [X] in which the Committee determined that Mr ZU’s conduct constituted unsatisfactory conduct pursuant to s 12(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act) by reason of a breach of r 3 of the Conduct and Client Care Rules.2 1 At various times the Standards Committee file includes Ms WD as a complainant. The two costs assessors’ reports also include her as a complainant. Ms WD has lodged a separate complaint about Mr ZU. This review is a r...

9. ENVC Hearing 6Oct14 DM expert David Serjeant [pdf, 307 KB]

   ...compromise activities of national or regional importance that have a functional need to locate and operate in the coastal marine area; ... (i) set back development from the coastal marine area and other water bodies, where practicable and reasonable, to protect the natural character, open space, public access and amenity values ofthe coastal environment.” 17. I consider that all three of these policies are relevant and provide over- arching guidance to the importance of provisions f...

10. [2023] NZIACDT 9 - WS v Lawlor (23 March 2023) [pdf, 318 KB]

    ...instalments. First expression and work visa application filed [8] The expression of interest under the skilled migrant category seems to have been filed almost immediately, as Immigration New Zealand (Immigration NZ) wrote to the complainant (care of Mr Lawlor) on 21 March 2019 advising that she had been invited to 3 apply for residence. She was informed she had four months to make the residence application and no extension would be considered. Mr Lawlor told her of the invit...