Search Results

1. Manuel v Carroll - Lot 1 Deposited Plan 5004 Part Waimarama 3A1A1 (2020) 83 Takitimu MB 41(83 TKT 41) [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...has damaged the land and has sought to improperly obtain title for himself. Mr Carroll claims that Ms Manuel’s approach is inconsistent with tikanga Māori and that he should be allowed to remain on the land for the rest of his life, given the care and protection he has provided for the whenua and the fact that he has put in place a sewerage and water system that will benefit all owners in the future. Mr Carroll would strongly prefer that further alternative dispute resolution be...

2. [2019] NZEnvC 165 SKP Incorporated v Auckland Council [pdf, 761 KB]

   ...might decide the case other than judicially and on its merits. Secondly, the test requires consideration of whether there is a logical and sufficient connection between those circumstances and that apprehension. 12. If, following the Judge's careful consideration and discussion with the Principal Judge, the Judge concerned is satisfied that there is a real possibility that he/she cannot act impartially, or is satisfied that a fair-minded, objective and fully informed observer mig...

3. Auckland Standards Committee 5 v Stuhlmann [2022] NZLCDT 16 (2 June 2022) [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...suspend Mr Stuhlmann from practise? Among other issues, this is the one that bites most in this case. [3] Reflecting the purposes of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act),1 the Tribunal’s role involves maintaining public confidence, protecting consumers, and recognising the status of the legal profession (and conveyancers). Fitting the appropriate response to the conduct in any case is nuanced work. Principles and binding precedents must be observed. The wisdom offer...

4. Fear v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 411) NZREADT 17 [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...found that Mr Fear had engaged in unsatisfactory conduct, in that he had disclosed confidential information about Mr and Mrs Sutton to the purchaser of the property, in breach of r 6.1 of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012 (“the Rules”), and had put the Suttons under undue and unfair pressure to accept the purchaser’s offer for the property, in breach of rr 6.3 and 9.2. The Committee did not uphold the Suttons’ complaint as to collu...

5. CAC10050 v Brown [2013] NZREADT 48 [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...work and those which are not. They submit that the defendant’s analysis does not properly reflect the evidence which is that the process was one (seamless) transaction. Mr Hodge submitted that a piecemeal approach would undermine the consumer protection purpose of the Act and ignore the fact that some matters not within the definition such as placing advertisements, are real estate agency work when carried out by an agent for the purpose of bringing about a sale of a particular proper...

6. Russell - Waitoto Māori Reserve 755 Blk 3 Arawata SD (2016) 37 Te Waipounamu MB 139 (37 TWP 139) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...2 and s 17 of the Act. … [75] Some of the further objectives in s 17(2) are particularly relevant to the present ahu whenua trust proposal, namely, ascertaining and giving effect to the wishes of the owners, promoting practical solutions, protecting minority interests against an oppressive majority, and protecting majority interests against an unreasonable minority. 6 Far North District Council – Okahu 3B2B2 (2014) 91 Taitoke...

7. Sutton v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 411) & Fear [2017] NZREADT 27 [pdf, 243 KB]

   ...Committee 411 (“the Committee”) dated 10 May 2016 (“the substantive decision”), in which the Committee found that the second respondent, Mr Fear, had breached rr 6.1, 6.3, and 9.2 of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012 (“the Rules”) and was guilty of unsatisfactory conduct under s 72 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 (“the Act”). The appellants have also appealed against the Committee’s decision dated 21 July 2016 (“the pe...

8. Varela v Devi [2014] NZIACDT 85 (15 September 2014) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...standards of conduct are maintained in the occupation concerned.” [9] When imposing sanctions those statutory purposes require consideration of at least four factors which may materially bear upon maintaining appropriate standards of conduct: [9.1] 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 ...” [9.2] Demanding minimum standards of conduct: Dentice v Valuers Registrat...

9. Complaints Assessment Committee 408 v Nicholas Schembri, Joseph Lupi & Timothy Kearins [2017] NZREADT 56 [pdf, 272 KB]

   ...negligent real estate agency work. [8] The Tribunal found that Mr Lupi failed to properly supervise Mr Schembri and thus failed to ensure that s 36(2A) of the LCA was complied with. He also breached Rule 5.1 (failure to exercise due skill and care) and Rule 5.2 (failure to have a sound knowledge of the Act and Rules). [9] Mr Lupi was found guilty of misconduct. Mr Kearins [10] Mr Kearins was charged with misconduct under s 73(c)(i) or s 73(b) of the Act. [11] The Tribuna...

10. LCRO 215/2020 YY v RN (27 September 2021) [pdf, 207 KB]

    ...further action on the complaint. [24] In reaching that decision the Committee concluded that:1 (a) in giving consideration to Mr RN’s age and poor state of health, and the fact that he no longer holds a practising certificate, the consumer protection purpose of the Act would not be served by taking the matter any further; and (b) having considered the length of time that had elapsed between the date when the subject matter of the complaint arose and the date when the complaint...