Search Results

1. National Standards Committee 1 v Reed [2021] NZLCDT 31 (2 December 2021) [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...been established, may demonstrate insight by the practitioner into the causes and effects of the wrongdoing. This, coupled with acceptance of responsibility for the misconduct, may indicate that a lesser penalty than striking off is sufficient to protect the public in the future. [188] For the same reason, the practitioner’s previous disciplinary history may also assume considerable importance. In some cases, the fact that a practitioner has not been guilty of wrongdoings in the pas...

2. AG v ZT LCRO 159 / 2010 (18 February 2011) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...conduct met a standard of professionalism that was required and expected in the circumstances, in this case specifically relating to the scope of enquiry concerning the nature of ownership of the house. [21] The Practitioner denied any failure to protect her clients’ interests, implied that H did not hold positive feelings for the Applicant, and asserted that H had intended to leave nothing to the Applicant. I have discerned no evidence to support these submissions, noting that H...

3. Kaufusi v Tangilanu [2014] NZIACDT 105 (01 October 2014) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...options available; [2.2.2] Carry out the work she agreed to perform; and [2.2.3] Communicate sufficiently with her client during the process. [3] The Tribunal upheld the complaint on the grounds of negligence (section 44(2)(a) of the Act), lack of care, diligence, and professionalism in performing services (clause 1.1(a) of the Code of Conduct), breach of duties relating to written agreements (clause 1.5(a), (b) and (d)), breach of duties relating to fees (clause 8(b), (c) and (e)), an...

4. [2021] NZEnvC 195 Canyon Vineyard Limited v Central Otago District Council [pdf, 913 KB]

   ...further scenario is where no costs are awarded at all. This would normally be the position in relation to plan appeals under Schedule 1 or in cases where some aspect of the public interest counts against an award of costs being made. Environmental Protection Authority v BW Offshore Singapore Pte Ltd12 [16] After Bendigo's application was lodged with the court, the court became aware of a High Court decision of Environmental Protection Attthoriry v BW Offi'hore Singapore...

5. COES - EiC - J R Sullivan (5 Feb 2021) [pdf, 2.4 MB]

   ...Jillian Ruth Sullivan 5 February2021 2 Qualifications and experience 1 My name is Jillian Ruth Sullivan. 2 I am self-employed engaged in writing, teaching, running accommodation for railtrailers and taking care of my property of twenty acres bordering the Ida Burn in Oturehua. 3 I was previously employed each USA summer by the Highlights Foundation, Pennsylvania, and Rosemont College, Philadelphia, teaching fiction and creative non-fiction....

6. Te Ariki o Kahukura v Moore – Manukorihi 1B Section 2 (2013) 313 Aotea MB 254 (313 AOT 254) [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...owners may be kept informed of any proposals relating to any land, and a forum in which the owners might discuss any such proposal: (c) To determine or facilitate the settlement of disputes and other matters among the owners of any land: (d) To protect minority interests in any land against an oppressive majority, and to protect majority interests in the land against an unreasonable minority: (e) To ensure fairness in dealings with the owners of any land in multiple ownership:...

7. [2021] NZEmpC 6 Bowen v Bank of New Zealand [pdf, 251 KB]

   ...2020 in support of her application for removal. BNZ asserts that the conversation was intended to be confidential and was conducted for the purpose of BNZ obtaining legal advice from its lawyer. As a result, BNZ claims that the conversation is protected by legal privilege and that it has not taken any steps to waive this privilege. Is the issue now moot? [11] Ms Bowen’s primary response to the claim of privilege is that, because the references to the alleged privileged communi...

8. VL Nair v Devi [2014] NZIACDT 86 (15 September 2014) [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...are maintained in the occupation concerned.” 3 [10] When imposing sanctions those statutory purposes require consideration of at least four factors which may materially bear upon maintaining appropriate standards of conduct: [10.1] Protecting the public: Section 3 of the Act states “The purpose of this Act is to promote and protect the interests of consumers receiving immigration advice ...” [10.2] Demanding minimum standards of conduct: Dentice v Valuers Registration...

9. BORA Judicature Modernisation Bill [pdf, 321 KB]

   ...discrimination on the basis of age, contrary to s 19 NZBORA. 32.Setting a mandatory limit, however, also has an important purpose: namely the preservation of judicial independence. The importance of this purpose is affirmed by s 25(a) NZBORA, which protects the right to trial by an independent and impartial court, and s 27 rights to natural justice. 33.A mandatory retirement age may be rationally connected to achieving those purposes, as it forms part of a wider range of statut...

10. Finau v Tangilanu [2014] NZIACDT 96 (01 October 2014) [pdf, 184 KB]

    ...provide professional support. [2.3] The Tribunal found on the material before it that it should uphold the complaint in these respects. [3] The Tribunal found Ms Tangilanu failed to meet the Code of Conduct’s duty to carryout instructions with due care, diligence, respect and professionalism (clause 1), and the requirement to confirm in writing when work ceased part way through an immigration process (clause 3(b)). The Parties’ Positions on Sanctions The Authority [4] The Auth...