Search Results

1. BORA Financial Markets Conduct Bill [pdf, 474 KB]

   ...Bill, we note that reversal of the onus of proof is generally considered to be more easily justifiable for "regulatory" offences. Those who choose to participate in regulated industries should be expected to meet certain expectations of care and accept the enhanced standards of behaviour. The offences discussed in this advice are regulatory in nature. • With respect to the penalty level of the offences discussed in this advice it is important to note that in the finan...

2. List-of-Fee-Changes-1-July-2025.pdf [pdf, 519 KB]

   ........................................................................................................................................... 19 Disputes Tribunal ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 Immigration and Protection Tribunal ......................................................................................................................... 19 Lawyers and Conveyan...

3. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Woodroffe [2025] NZLCDT 1 (7 January 2025) [pdf, 258 KB]

   ...admitted (what was plainly evident to us) that some of her material during the 13 September 2020 broadcast referred to the client’s case. [31] Mrs Woodroffe argues that she had the right to say what she did because her freedom of expression is protected under s 14 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. She regards her broadcasts as a public service because she addresses legal matters that may be of interest to listeners. She finds that using real examples adds interest to...

4. [2016] NZEmpC 65 Caffe Coffee (NZ) Ltd v Farrimond [pdf, 418 KB]

   ...and scope of the intended business operation. That led to a wide range of assertions some of which were speculative. Whilst it was understandable that Mr Alford reacted in this way, his reasoning with regard to particular assertions requires careful analysis as to accuracy. That said, his evidence was given openly and honestly; on a number of issues he made appropriate concessions which persuaded the Court that his evidence on matters of which he had direct knowledge was reliabl...

5. LCRO 32/2024 MP v LG (21 January 2025) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...[23] After setting out her view of the course of events, the applicant summarised the elements of her complaint as follows: 1. Failed to deliver any legal services to me. 2. Violated the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules) by not acting in accordance with the prescribed rules of conduct and client care for lawyers. 3. Demands payment for services she had never provided. 1 I presume she meant “detailed”, or “comprehensive”....

6. LS v TD LCRO 298/2012 Penalty decision (23 February 2015) [pdf, 68 KB]

   ...issued a decision (the findings decision) in which I found Mr TD’s conduct constituted unsatisfactory conduct pursuant to s 12(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 by reason of breaches of rules 7, 10, 11 and 11.1 of the Conduct and Client Care Rules.1 [2] Both parties have now provided submissions as to penalty as requested. Background [3] Mr TD had prepared a will for Mrs LS’s mother in which she purported to appoint Mrs LS and her sister as trustees of the [Trust...

7. LT v SH [2019] NZIACDT 57 (7 August 2019) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...Tribunal on 13 December 2017. The following breaches of the Code by [the adviser] are alleged: (1) by writing a document to Immigration New Zealand falling short of what was required to persuade it to grant a visa, there has been a lack of due care in regard to the complainant’s circumstances, in breach of cl 1; (2) by providing incorrect and potentially misleading information to Immigration New Zealand, in breach of cl 1; 2 The comp...

8. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee No. 1 v Grave [2016] NZLCDT 8 [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...Rule 11.1 By engaging in conduct that was likely to mislead beneficiary Ms X as to the potential value of the estate; Mr Grave accepted that he contravened the following Rules of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (“the Rules”): Rule 5.11 By acting for PP as executor of both estates where by reason of a claimed mistake as to title there was potential for a claim by either estate against Mr Grave; Rule 6.1 By acting for PP in the adm...

9. [2021] NZEnvC 098 Maungaharuru-Tangitu Trust v Hastings District Council [pdf, 4 MB]

   IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA Kl TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND Decision No [2021] NZEnvC 98 of an appeal under clause 14( 1) of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991 MAUNGAHARURU-TANGITO TRUST (ENV-2015-WLG-054) Appellant HASTINGS DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent REVISED DECISION ON APPEAL Decision issued: f 1. July 2021 Costs are reserved : 2 4 5 6 Introduction [1] This Court issued its

10. Rafiq v Civil Aviation Authority [2013] NZHRRT 10 [pdf, 132 KB]

    ...renewed at the hearings should Mr Rafiq indeed elect not to appear. [9] Mr Child has also signalled that in the event of these proceedings being determined in favour of any defendant an application for costs may well follow. Mr Rafiq should make careful note. His non-attendance at the hearings will undoubtedly make him more vulnerable to an order that he pay costs in each of the eight proceedings. [10] The Tribunal has in the past encouraged Mr Rafiq to attend the hearings. It takes...