Search Results

1. Joanne Barbara Noble - Evidence in Chief [pdf, 3.2 MB]

   ...decision-making on resource consents (and plan changes) in relation to land in the coastal environment and the coastal marine area, and include the natural heritage (NH) and iwi resource management (IW) policies. In general these policies relate to the protection of matters of national importance identified under s6 of the Act, and management of risks from coastal hazards. 22. Part Four contains activity based policies and rules that reflect the restrictions on use of the coastal ma...

2. LCRO 217/2016 and 218/2016 RE and YI v WG (14 November 2018) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...to the fact that the invoice included reference to work relating to the dissolution of the partnership commencing two years prior to the invoice. 4 (b) did Mr WG breach r 8.7.1 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules) when acting against YI and RE? (c) were Mr WG’s fees fair and reasonable? (d) did Mr WG fail to ensure that his practice was administered in an appropriate manner and/or breach his obligations under rr 10 and...

3. Campbell & Anor v REAA CAC 20007 & Anor [2014] NZREADT 42 [pdf, 60 KB]

   ...rules made under this Act; or (c) is incompetent or negligent; or (d) would reasonably be regarded by agents of good standing as being unacceptable.” [12] Rules 6.4 and 9.21 of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2009 respectively read: “Rule 6.4: A licensee must not mislead a customer or client, nor provide false information, nor withhold information that should by law or fairness be provided to a customer or client. Rule 9.21: A license...

4. [2019] NZREADT 52 - Grewal (25 November 2019) [pdf, 190 KB]

   ...and Mr Mason were heard by the Tribunal on 13 July 2018. The charges alleged that they each failed to make a report to the Authority as to Mr Grewal’s conduct, as required by r 7.2 of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012. In a decision dated 6 September 2018, both were found guilty of misconduct under s 73(b) of the Act (that their failure to report constituted seriously negligent or seriously incompetent real estate agency work.1 In a pe...

5. Connors - Rakautaua 1B2A2 (2007) 180 Aotea MB 242 (180 AOT 242) [pdf, 825 KB]

   ...the introduction by the legislature, of a first right of refusal, strikes a balance between land-owner control or tino rangatiratanga on the one hand and hapu interest in a collective taonga toku iho on the other ... in our view the removal of that protection should only be allowed where the application is in some material way outside the ordinary run of cases. That must be so, because to adopt any other approach would be to undermine the very careful balance between owners and the wider...

6. [2019] NZREADT 54 - Houliston v CAC 1901, Lohmann & Webb (10 December 2019) [pdf, 237 KB]

   ...Summit, Mr Nalder, and so he advised Mr Webb that he would be dealing directly thereafter with the Authority. [12] The complaint which Mr Houliston made to the Authority was that: [a] Mr Lohmann breached s 136 of the Act; [b] Mr Webb failed to protect Mr Houliston throughout the sales process and failed to disclose Mr Lohmann's “conflict of interest”; [c] the licensees had misled Mr Houliston about whether or not there was a competing party who was intending to make an...

7. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Burcher [2019] NZLCDT 12 [pdf, 307 KB]

   ...“general, not file specific, mentoring may be permitted”. Ms Ollivier went on to state the Society’s expectation that “… any contact with clients about updating wills/trusts would be carried out by other staff” and finally she noted that “care will need to be taken that other lawyers do not form the impression that you are continuing to practise although that seems unlikely from what you have described”. [19] Approximately a week later Mr Burcher sent a further email...

8. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Anderson [2022] NZLCDT 25 (22 July 2022) [pdf, 238 KB]

   ...particular, her estranged husband, Mr G, having agreed to move out of the home that they had shared (and which was owned by a trust and separate property in terms of the s 21 Agreement), was 4 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008. 5 Ms Anderson had only been married to this man for two years, and they had a contracting out agreement pursuant to s 21 of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976. 4 reneging on that agreement and refusing to...

9. DL v EX LCRO 128/2012 (16 December 2013) [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...rendered to Mr DN when he was alive; 4 b. he had anticipated that some of the children from Mr DN’s first marriage may challenge his will and that, when this occurred, the Practitioner successfully negotiated settlement of two potential Family Protection claims; and c. that his legal costs of $30,547.81 equated to approximately 60 hours work for him, undertaken over many months. The Practitioner did not feel that this was in any way an excessive charge, but noted that he...

10. BW v SC LCRO 1/2015 (8 April 2015) [pdf, 85 KB]

    ...years. [55] The conduct on which the Committee based its decision relates to what appear to be multiple breaches of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Trust Account) Regulations 2008 and the Lawyers and Conveyancers (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 in relation to the firm’s trust account, and mishandling the firm’s money. [56] Although his admissions to the Standards Committee may present something of an impediment, it is open to Mr BW to contest evidence befor...