Search Results

1. Fish & Game - EiC - J W Hayes - Ecological Flow (5 Feb 2021) [pdf, 1.6 MB]

   ...29 “Safeguard”, “protect” and “maintain”, without qualification, by definition, assume a binary or threshold relationship between an ecological response and the physical environment. For example, safeguarding literally means “protecting” or “keeping safe from harm”; it implies an element of “precaution”. And from an ecological perspective it could be argued that “life-supporting capacity” refers to the capacity of a water body to support life in all i...

2. Doria v Diamond Laser Medispa Taupo Limited & Ors [2025] NZHRRT 12 [pdf, 335 KB]

   ...effective immediately. [2] Ms Doria claims this was discrimination on the basis of her sex (pregnancy) and in the alternative, disability.2 The defendants maintain they were entitled to put her on early leave under the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act 1987 (PLEPA) and, for that reason, no discrimination occurred. BACKGROUND [3] Ms Doria qualified as a beauty therapist in 2014 and was offered a job by Ms Blakeney-Williams at Diamond Laser in January 2016. Ms Doria...

3. Scope of inquiry Minute October 2021 plus appendices [pdf, 720 KB]

   ...necessary to preserve such confidentiality, the inquiry must be held, in whole or in part, in private. In addition, the RCOI was required to restrict access to inquiry information where it considered it necessary to do so for reasons including protecting New Zealand’s security or defence interests, protecting the identity of witnesses or other persons, avoiding prejudice to the maintenance of the law, and ensuring protection of fair trial rights. The RCOI was expressly prohibited...

4. Rec-Recap-2024-Q1-FINAL.pdf [pdf, 873 KB]

   ...O’Malley [2024] NZCorC 6 (17 January 2024) ....................................................................... 25 Ormond [2024] NZCorC 31 (16 February 2024) ..................................................................... 29 Medical Care ............................................................................................................................ 30 Farrelly [2024] NZCorC 36 (26 February 2024) ........................................................................

5. GA & BD v X SC LCRO 186/2013 (5 May 2014) [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...which if proven could show a cavalier approach by Mr GA and/or Mr BD to the relevant Nominee Company Rules. Although some of the breaches identified may be “technical” the Committee held the view that the relevant Rules are put in place to protect investors and manage the nominee company transactions. They need to be strictly complied with. The Committee considered each of the issues/conduct in the notice of hearing separately and decided that, if proven, each of them would...

6. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Parshotam [2016] NZLCDT 15 [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...accused, another practitioner, Mr Horsley,1 [4] The Tribunal is concerned not to accord unsustainable weight to the aggravating feature. However, we would not wish to see the penalty process in disciplinary proceedings, with its focus on public protection rather than punishment, assuming the more mathematical and precise features of criminal sentencing. faced an additional charge of misconduct, which he admitted. That led to a three year suspension, as compared with the two year...

7. AH v ZP LCRO 82/2011 (7 February 2014) [pdf, 134 KB]

   ...details about the client, particularly in respect of N’s age which was alleged to have been misrepresented. [2] Further complaints were subsequently added. These alleged that the Practitioner had breached Rule 2.5 of the Conduct and Client Care Rules (the Rules) 1 in respect of certifications made to the lender concerning both the borrower’s capacity and confirming the identity of her client as the person authorised to lodge the instrument. Related to this was an alleged br...

8. LCRO 103/2021 & LCRO 58/2022, LCRO 104/2021 and LCRO 105/2021 GS v ABC Ltd & HY, [Law Firm A] v ABC Ltd & HY and SW v [Area] Standards Committee [X] (24 November 2022) [pdf, 595 KB]

   ...FQ (for Ms HY) provided a reply to the lawyers’ response to Ms HY’s complaint on 14 May 2020. It was submitted for Ms HY that the lawyers had: (a) failed at every step of their engagement to fulfil the fundamental obligations and duties of care to Ms HY; and (b) provided erroneous advice in respect to the issue as to whether Ms HY could legally remove ducting from her unit, and improperly counselled Ms HY to defend the proceedings brought in the Tenancy Tribunal by the body c...

9. BOAC v Auckland Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 50-57 [pdf, 357 KB]

   ...company of some substance was involved. [28] Heath J in Sunset Terraces,6 whose decision was upheld on appeal by the Supreme Court, defined the duty of a local authority as follows: In my judgment, a territorial authority owes a duty of care to anyone who acquires a unit, the intended use of which has been disclosed as residential in the plans and specifications submitted with the building consent application or is known to the Council to be for that then purpose. The du...

10. LCRO 233/2014 IB v KZ (27 June 2018) [pdf, 204 KB]

    ...named employee [there is no suggestion the use of this 3 word referred to any other situation but in the witness box, i.e. there was no physical threat to Ms X’s safety]; (f) Mr IB had breached a number of the Rules of Conduct and Client Care (RCCC);1 (g) Mr IB had not acted with integrity, respect and courtesy in detailing how he proposed to treat a witness; and (h) the settlement of the substantive trial did not affect KZ’s wish to continue with their complaint. [11]...