Search Results

1. [2017] NZEnvC 090 Pierau v Auckland Council [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...Regional Council C81/2007; Calder Stewart Industrtes Limited v Christchurch City Council C1712006. 3 Such as Canterbury Regional Council v Christchurch City Council (2001) 7 ELRNZ 113; Campbell v Napier City Council W6712005; Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society Inc v Whakatane District Council [2012] NZEnvC 38. 4 At paragraph [17]. 5 [2015] NZEnvC 218 at [24]. 7 assessment of the application. We add that we can see no basis upon which Parliament could have intended that...

2. [2017] NZEnvC 090 Pierau v Auckland Council [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...Regional Council C81/2007; Calder Stewart Industrtes Limited v Christchurch City Council C1712006. 3 Such as Canterbury Regional Council v Christchurch City Council (2001) 7 ELRNZ 113; Campbell v Napier City Council W6712005; Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society Inc v Whakatane District Council [2012] NZEnvC 38. 4 At paragraph [17]. 5 [2015] NZEnvC 218 at [24]. 7 assessment of the application. We add that we can see no basis upon which Parliament could have intended that...

3. Rec-Recap-2023-Q2-FINAL.pdf [pdf, 1013 KB]

   ...Potter [2023] NZCorC 51 (27 April 2023) ............................................................................... 27 Simpson [2023] NZCorC 67 (23 May 2023) ........................................................................... 28 Medical Care ............................................................................................................................ 31 Croft [2023] NZCorC 59 (15 May 2023) .............................................................................

4. INZ (Calder) v Shearer [2019] NZIACDT 41 (19 June 2019) [pdf, 286 KB]

   ...communication. [11] A typical application was lodged on 21 December 2015 on behalf of one of the clients.3 Section B3 on the form identified Ms Shearer as the person for communications. It stated that she could be contacted at IAL Employment, care of the training centre, the Philippines street address of which was given. Ms Shearer’s New Zealand email address (at Immigration Assist) and mobile telephone number were given. In section H,

5. INZ (Calder) v Horan [2019] NZIACDT 13 (11 March 2019) [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...and therefore any meeting will also be attended by my legal advocate. 5 … If you feel that I am acting in any way illegally in my support of my clients then please feel free to fine some definitive charge in that I am acting illegally in protecting the rights of my clients. I will of course vigorously challenge any action against me so I would advise proper rationale in any such irrational action however that is up to you as a public servant. [12] On 13 August 2015, Mr Hor...

6. CAC20004 v Whisker [2015] NZREADT 61 [pdf, 249 KB]

   ...defendant transferred into his trust account the sum of $19,600 and told Mr Bright that those monies were prepaid advertising monies from a number of clients and, as the future of the defendant’s company was uncertain he, the defendant, wanted the money protected before returning it to the clients. [35] Mr Bright said that, a week later on 17 October 2012, the defendant contacted him again to provide details for the return of the monies to the various clients but it was not possible...

7. LCRO 242/2014 HW v DL [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...obliquely addressed the conflict of interests arising between the various parties when it addressed the failure by the respondent to decline to act for all parties. [19] Rule 6.1 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules) provides: A lawyer must not act for more than 1 client on a matter in any circumstances where there is a more than negligible risk that the lawyer may be unable to discharge the obligations owed to 1 or more of th...

8. Shropshire v March LCRO 64 / 2010 (28 October 2010) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...responses of the parties, the Standards Committee determined, pursuant to section 152(2)(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act), to take no further action with regard to the complaint. The Committee perceived the Conduct and Client Care Rules relevant to the complaint were 2.3, 5, 6, 10, 12, 13 and 13.3. [2] The Applicant sought a review of the Committee‟s decision on the basis that the “Standards Committee erred in fact and in law”. He particularly chall...

9. LCRO 156/2016 KZ v XL on behalf of [Company A] (18 January 2019) [pdf, 320 KB]

   ...another lawyer, Mr BN, supporting her approach. He described his experience in dealing with leaky building claims, including acting for local authorities such as the Council. [43] Mr BN said that “the proposal to transfer the claim requires careful consideration to ensure that it doesn’t weaken the claimant’s case”. He considered that where limitation issues might arise it is important to obtain “agreement with the defendant’s solicitors prior to the transfer that any...

10. [2016] NZEmpC 91 Khurana v Singh [pdf, 100 KB]

    ...would be responsible for pursuing such an action. In default, Mr Singh could raise these issues at the same time as he sought an order authorising him to continue with his proceedings against Corporate Energy. However, Mr Singh would need to give careful consideration to costs incurred in pursuing any such claim against the directors in this way. Even if successful, any recovery procured from the directors might simply have the effect of providing funds for distribution to all of...