Search Results

1. Juneja v Kumar [2016] NZIACDT 13 (18 March 2016) [pdf, 116 KB]

   ...of his professional offending. [28] Mr Moses correctly submitted that the Tribunal must not speculate and go beyond the evidence before it. The parties may be aware of matters they do not, and should not, disclose to the Tribunal. The Registrar protects the public interest in that regard. [29] Accordingly, the Tribunal accepts Mr Kumar’s evidence that in the circumstances in which he provided his professional services he did so with competence and care, except for a minor error of ju...

2. [2020] NZREADT 35 - SureCapital (13 August 2020) [pdf, 246 KB]

   ...the requirement for any penalty to have a general and individual deterrent effect is especially important in this case. She submitted that even if the Tribunal were to consider that SureCapital has learned from this experience, and will be more careful in the future, any penalty must mark the conduct in a way that sends a message to the real estate industry. [20] Ms Lim submitted that the fine should be set at a level that takes into account that the maximum available fine for corp...

3. Auckland Standards Committees 2 and 3 v Mason [2019] NZLCDT 5 [pdf, 89 KB]

   ...practising certificate, it having been declined on his last application, by the New Zealand Law Society. He has not chosen to contest that and indicates he will not seek to practise law again. This has implications in relation to the need for public protection. [40] Mr Mason’s circumstances are quite impecunious. He is an undischarged bankrupt earning relatively low wages working as a caregiver for intellectually disabled people. He also has had some employment assisting an im...

4. [2022] NZEmpC 122 Reunited Employees Assoc Inc v Nelmac Ltd [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...believe a plaintiff will be unable to pay the defendant’s costs if the claim does not succeed.23 [28] The discretion is a broad one. Regard must be had to the overall justice of the case, and the respective interests of both parties must be carefully weighed up. That balancing exercise was summarised by the Court of Appeal in McLachlan v MEL Network Ltd in the following way:24 [15] The rule itself contemplates an order for security where the plaintiff will be unable to meet an...

5. [2024] NZIACDT 05 - UT v Lawlor (18 January 2024) [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...Disciplinary Tribunal [2017] NZHC 376 at [93]. 4 Immigration Advisers Licensing Act, s 50. 6 [27] The sanctions that may be imposed by the Tribunal are set out in the Act.5 The focus of professional disciplinary proceedings is not punishment but the protection of the public.6 [28] It is the civil standard of proof, the balance of probabilities, that is applicable in professional disciplinary proceedings. However, the quality of the evidence required to meet that standard may...

6. Wellington Standards Committee 1 v King [2024] NZLCDT 46 (18 December 2024) [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...extensions of time. [30] In addition, there were concerns about privacy because her printing facilities were shared with another organisation, and she did not always ensure she collected printing as soon as it was completed, meaning that it was not protected from inadvertent disclosure. [31] Ms King has told the Standards Committee and the Tribunal that she suffers from a serious sinus condition which has had a very bad effect on her ability to work and manage generally. Furth...

7. [2021] NZIACDT 23 - CL v Khetarpal (24 September 2021) [pdf, 228 KB]

   ...contempt for the disciplinary process. She has not demonstrated remorse. There is no evidence she has learned any lesson from all these complaints against her. Ms Khetarpal is unfit to be a member of the profession. Vulnerable immigrants must be protected from her. [43] This brings the Tribunal to consideration of the sanctions. Caution or censure [44] Ms Khetarpal is hereby censured. The Tribunal marks its serious disapproval of her conduct. Training [45] The Regis...

8. XB & XC v A North Island Standards Committee LCRO 207-208 / 2012 (10 June 2013) [pdf, 163 KB]

   ...consider this submission provides a convincing argument for the arrangement put in place by Mr XB. Has there been a breach of section 110 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006? [21] The purposes of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act include the protection of consumers of legal services and the maintenance of public confidence in the provision of legal services. These cannot be achieved if questionable arrangements are made with regard to client funds. I do not mean questionab...

9. Pope v Human Rights Commission (Strike-Out Application) [2014] NZHRRT 3 [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...he or she may do or report or say in the course of the exercise or intended exercise of his or her functions under the Act (unless it is shown that he or she acted in bad faith). [47.2] In the face of these provisions it would be absurd were the protection conferred by s 25 of the Act to apply to proceedings in any court, but not in a tribunal. [47.3] The more so in the case of the Human Rights Review Tribunal given its characteristics as discussed in O’Neill. [48] It follows t...

10. [2021] NZREADT 35 - Brady (7 July 2021) [pdf, 287 KB]

    ...transparent, and effective.9 [11] In order to meet the purposes of the Act, penalties for misconduct and unsatisfactory conduct are determined bearing in mind the need to maintain a high standard of conduct in the industry, the need for consumer protection, the maintenance of confidence in the industry, and the need for deterrence. [12] A penalty should be appropriate for the particular nature of the misbehaviour, and the Tribunal should endeavour to maintain consistency in penaltie...