Search Results

1. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Aitken [2020] NZLCDT 13 [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...offending or of the practitioner, then, if appropriate, considers relevant authorities before making an assessment about a proportionate response. [17] The Tribunal must, in assessing penalty, be mindful of the purposes of the Act which are the protection of the public and the maintenance of confidence in the provision of legal services. [18] Penalty in professional discipline cases is not imposed for punitive purposes, although it is recognised that there can be punitive outcome...

2. [2022] NZEmpC 26 Tupe v The Board of Trustees of Te Manawa O Tuhoe Trust [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...succeed.4 The Court has a broad discretion to consider whether security for costs should be ordered. In exercising that discretion, regard must be had to the overall justice of the case and the respective interests of both parties need to be carefully weighed up.5 That balancing exercise was summarised by the Court of Appeal in AS McLachlan Ltd v MEL Network Ltd as follows:6 [15] The rule itself contemplates an order for security where the plaintiff will be unable to meet an...

3. Auckland Standards Committee 4 v Holdaway [2022] NZLCDT 49 (22 December 2022) [pdf, 145 KB]

   ...about the effect of publicity on her reputation. From Standards Committee submissions, she is aware that strike-off is being sought as their prime submission. We have managed the publicity aspects short-term by suppression orders. [24] We have carefully weighed the gravity of the interim order on Ms Holdaway before determining that we were satisfied that it needed to be made to give proper effect to the legislative intent. [25] This decision may not be published so long as the int...

4. L Ltd v B Ltd [2024] NZDT 86 (22 February 2024) [pdf, 139 KB]

   ...the money wrongly. 3. The issues to be determined were as follows: a. Was B Ltd legally entitled to take the money from L Ltd in these circumstances, bearing in mind the terms of the contract between the parties, any allegations of a lack of care by L Ltd, or any harsh or unconscionable contractual terms, or behaviour on B Ltd’s part? b. What if anything is payable by B Ltd? Was B Ltd legally entitled to take the money from L Ltd in these circumstances, bearing in mind the te...

5. Equal Pay Amendment Bill [pdf, 303 KB]

   ...Conclusion 25. 11 12 13 oncluded that the Bill appears to be consistent with the Bill of Rights Act. eral Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses (Australasia) Limited v Royal Commission of Inquiry into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the care of Faith-based Institutions [2024] NZCA 128 at [57]. Christian Congregation, above n 12, at [57]. Westco Lagan v Attorney-General [2001] 1 NZLR 40....

6. WA & WB v North Islands Standards Committee LCRO 127 / 2012 (5 June 2013) [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...clients of [VXZ]. 14. The Committee noted there was nothing to suggest dishonesty on the part of the practitioners however there had been serious breaches of the legal requirements for the operation of lawyers’ trust accounts, which exist for the protection of clients and for the maintenance of public confidence in the legal profession. [11] It then made the following orders: In relation to Mr [WA] the Committee makes the following orders: a. That Mr [WA] be censured pursuant...

7. BORA Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...interest of the intrusion on the particular right protected by the Bill of Rights Act; (3) the limits sought to be placed on the application of the [Bill of Rights] Act provision in the particular case; and (4) the effectiveness of the intrusion in protecting the interests put forward to justify those limits." In our view this passage strikes the right note by capturing the nuanced and flexible standards that s 5 will ultimately require. 13. In essence, the inquiry is two-fold:...

8. Pepere - Tikitiki A23 (2001) 61 Ruatōria MB 150 (61 RUA 150) [pdf, 688 KB]

   ...further proceedings for rates accrued since the last action, and that although they would Seal Judgment they did not intend taking the matter any further while the existing Attachment Order of $50.00/week is operating. The GDC noted its intention to protect its ability to proceed with a sale of the property should the Attachment Order fall over. On 6 March 2001, the matter came before me for the last time before I reserved my decision. (See 60 Ruatoria MB 44-54) At that hearing counsel f...

9. CAC 413 v Marr [2019] NZREADT 28 - Penalty (1 July 2019) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...being provided by a funder, Mr Parkin. On Ms Marr’s and Mr Parkin’s instructions, Ms Guttenbeil inserted, signed, and initialled a nomination provision in favour of Mr Parkin into the auction sale agreement. Mr Parkin insisted on this as a protection in the event that Ms Marr could not obtain finance to complete the purchase. [4] Ms Marr intended that the property would be owned by two of her children. She arranged for two Agency-branded agreements for sale and purchase to be...

10. Electoral (Registration of Sentenced Prisoners Amendment Bill [pdf, 3.3 MB]

    ...expressed by the majority of the Supreme Court of Canada in Sail# 1) Canada (Chief Eleclowl Ofcei), but are not persuaded that its approach need be followed. Context is important. The Saln)e majority relied on the fact the right to vote was subject to protection from unjustifiable parliamentary limitation.' Any limitation on die right therefore required a special standard of justification, beyond that required for some other Charter rights and freedoms.10 No such special protection...