Search Results

1. Song v CAC 20008 & Clement [2014] NZREADT 54 [pdf, 55 KB]

   ...Monday afternoon who told him there should not be a problem in getting a new title, which was simply an updating of the old title. Their lawyer then told him and his wife that they could cancel the contract in terms of clauses inserted for their protection by the Licensee. Because the appellant and his wife liked the house, were first home buyers, very much needed the accommodation, and had spent money on a builders report, they decided to continue and defer settlement until the title w...

2. CAC v Hughes and Hape, CAC v Hughes and Lal [2016] NZREADT 57 [pdf, 336 KB]

   ...of Sentencing [22] The Tribunal must consider four matters when considering imposition of a penalty as set out in Real Estate Agents Authority v Lum-on [2012] NZREADT 47. [23] A penalty must fulfil the following functions. They are: [a] Protecting the public Section 3 of the Real Estate Agents Act provides that this is one of the purposes of the Act. [b] Maintenance of professional standards This was emphasised in Taylor v The General Medical Council and Dentice...

3. Mark Brown (filed 6 June 2017) [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...metres high over this estuary, a 110m tower on a 400m hill. The visual impact will be considerable in the immediate area. I believe there is absolutely no doubt that Porteous Hill is well within the coastal environment and therefore deserves the protection that other coastal features such as headlands have been given. 14. I am confused by the BEL landscape architects’ reports saying the effects of the turbine on our landscape will be less than significant and will introduce a “n...

4. BORA Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill [pdf, 419 KB]

   ...Accordingly, the question is whether the limitations are justified under s 5 BORA as "reasonable limits ... [that] can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society". 2.3 While it can be argued that the Bill does not sufficiently protect "legitimate dissent" by members in relation to the parties and so is BORA inconsistent, the better view, based on the Supreme Court's decision in Awatere Huata v Prebble [2005] 1 NZLR 289, is that the Bill is BORA con...

5. [2015] NZEmpC 59 Bracewell v Richmond Services Limited [pdf, 146 KB]

   ...release this 2 Richmond Services Ltd v Bracewell [2013] NZERA Auckland 481. 3 Bracewell v Richmond Services Ltd [2014] NZCA 629. information, it would do so since it was necessary to protect Client A from further abuse of her privacy. This step would be taken pursuant to r 11(2)(h)(i) of the Health Information Privacy Code 1994. As a result, I directed the Bay of Plenty DHB to file an affidavit from a person who had kno...

6. [2018] NZEnvC 035 The Wellington Company Ltd v Save Erskine College Trust [pdf, 7.9 MB]

   ...conditions to HNZPT, a delegation accepted by HNZPT. TWCL supports this and encourages SECT also to delegate its enforcement role . As TWCL recognises the Court cannot order that SECT delegate its enforcement role as given that SECT remains the Heritage Protection Authority. However, we are mindful that the conditions do need to be enforceable and we are minded not to stand in the way of possible future delegation to HNZPT should that body agree. 21WCL memorandum 2 March 2018 at [6]...

7. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Dangen [2019] NZLCDT 22 [pdf, 502 KB]

   ...charged significant fees for her attendances, without having been authorised by the Court, and in respect of some attendances which could not have been authorised by the Court. Additionally, she advanced $20,000 as a loan to a family member of the protected person, without any authority to do so. Issues 1. What are the applicable principles of penalty in relation to this matter? 2. What is the level of culpability of the practitioner on the continuum of negligent conduct? 3. Ar...

8. National Standards Committee 2 v Tingey [2023] NZLCDT 43 (10 October 2023) [pdf, 169 KB]

   ...the fact that the conduct occurred 12 to 14 years ago. Both the complainant and the respondent have moved on and achieved significantly in their respective careers and lives. [3] In a jurisdiction that is not supposed to be punitive but rather protective, the fixing of proportionate penalty involves many factors but must also be carried out with the purposes of the LCA1 in mind. Process to be followed [4] The starting point is: 1. To ascertain the seriousness of the miscond...

9. Sandy v Khan LCRO 181 / 2009 (25 December 2009) - Decision on orders [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...been changed. The Respondent’s name has not been amended. Decision on orders [1] In a decision of 9 December 2009 it was found that certain conduct of Mr Khan contravened r 6.1 (including its sub rules) of the Rules of Conduct and Client Care and is therefore unsatisfactory conduct pursuant to s 12(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006. It is not necessary to traverse the incidents of that breach which are set out in my earlier decision. [2] Ms Sandy was invited to pr...

10. 2021-03-15 D-G of Conservation opening subs [pdf, 246 KB]

    ...Wai 1. The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (NPSFM) sets out at 1.31 its fundamental concept – Te Mana o te Wai: (1) Te Mana o te Wai is a concept that refers to the fundamental importance of water and recognises that protecting the health of freshwater protects the health and wellbeing of the wider environment. It protects the mauri of the wai. Te Mana o te Wai is about restoring and preserving the balance between the water, the wider environment, and the co...