Search Results

1. Aitken v Laudermilk [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...any work done by Mr Fyfe was in itself the cause of a leak and damage. Accordingly, Mr Gary Fyfe is hereby removed. LIABILITY OF THE COUNCIL [78] The fourth respondent, the Marlborough District Council acknowledges that it owes a duty of care to the claimants as subsequent owners of the house. However the Council submits that its actions or omissions have not caused the losses claimed. Instead it argues that the claimants’ losses are due to lack of maintenance and the cla...

2. Family Legal Advice Service operational policy version 1.4 [pdf, 479 KB]

   Family Legal Advice Service Operational Policy for providing early legal advice for disputes under the Care of Children Act 2004 Family Legal Advice Service Operational Policy v1.4 August 2016 Although all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this document, the Ministry of Justice disclaims any and all responsibility for any inaccuracy, error, omission, or any other kind of inadequacy, deficiency, or flaw in, or in re...

3. Auckland Standards Committee v Castles [2013] NZLCDT 53 [pdf, 277 KB]

   NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2013] NZLCDT 53 LCDT 037/12 IN THE MATTER of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 and the Law Practitioners Act 1982 BETWEEN AUCKLAND STANDARDS COMMITTEE No. 3 AND EION MALCOLM JAMES CASTLES of Auckland, Lawyer CHAIR Judge D F Clarkson MEMBERS OF TRIBUNAL Mr W Chapman Ms C Rowe Ms M Scholtens QC Mr P Shaw HEARING at AUCKLAND DATES 18-19 July, 19-21

4. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights - government report back 5th report [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...focused on understanding links between maternity and early parenting support services and identifying who uses these services and who may be missing out. 15. Examples of results so far include a Maternity and “WellChild” needs assessment and care planning tool for early intervention. This tool has been in use in Porirua and Waikato since January 2011, and will ensure that needs are more consistently identified and referred to the appropriate places. 16. The inter-agency group ha...

5. Nightingale v CAC10055 & Lee, Godfrey & Barfoot & Thompson Ltd [2012] NZREADT 55 [pdf, 67 KB]

   ...purpose and give rise to different considerations than civil proceedings taken to obtain financial remedies. We agree that principles relating to issue estoppel must not be applied too rigidly where that would have the effect of undermining the consumer protection purpose of the disciplinary regime contained in the Real Estate Agents Act 2008. However, we accept that issue estoppel principles are relevant to the exercise by a Committee (or to us on appeal) of the discretion to take no fu...

6. Legal aid - limited approvals Operational Policy & application form draft [pdf, 888 KB]

   ...phone Legal Aid Provider Services at the Ministry of Justice national office on 04 918 8800 or email legalaidprovider@justice.govt.nz Sending in your application Please email this form and any attachments (such as your practising certificate, client care letter or letter of engagement) to legalaidprovider@justice.govt.nz with ‘Limited approval – Provider’ in the subject line. If you intend to print this form out for filling in or signing, please scan and email a pdf back to us. S...

7. Barfoot & Thompson Ltd v CAC302 & Ors [2016] NZREADT 22 [pdf, 176 KB]

   ...defect before disclosing such to others and, if the client does not agree to this disclosure, the licensee is to cease to act pursuant to Rule 10.8. [26] Mr Rea submits that, furthermore, it would be contrary to the purpose of Rule 10.7, which is the protection of customers, for disclosure of an adverse methamphetamine test to be delayed pending receipt of confirmation of such disclosure from a vendor. He noted that Mr N Powell of Forensic & Industrial Science Ltd gave evidence that...

8. S v J LCRO 5 / 2008 (13 February 2009) [pdf, 39 KB]

   ...That advice may have been provided forcefully. It may also be the case that Client S’s son, being in custody, felt pressured to accept the proposal, as it appeared the only way to get out of custody more or less immediately. [33] I have read carefully Client S’s son’s account of this series of events which he wrote in support of the Law Society complaint and is dated 10 October 2008. I place considerable weight on it. While he maintains his innocence in that letter and indica...

9. LCRO 130/2016 RB v ZB (28 June 2017) [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...Concerning the disparaging remarks issue the decision of the Standards Committee is confirmed. Orders [1] In giving consideration as to whether it is appropriate to order a penalty, it is to be noted that the function of the disciplinary process is protective, not punitive.40 In these particular circumstances, other than the public interest in lawyers maintaining professional standards and ensuring compliance with the rules, no broader issues of consumer protection or public welfa...

10. LCRO 207/2015 CA v BE (21 August 2018) [pdf, 205 KB]

    ...context of the breakdown of the employment relationship between Mrs CA and Mr BE’s client; 4 (d) Mr BE’s language and assertions were undoubtedly a reflection of the state of affairs between the parties; (e) Ms C’s instructions were protected by legal privilege and the Committee cannot go behind that to assess them; and (f) no other ancillary issues raised by Mrs CA raised professional conduct issues. Application for review [14] Mrs CA filed an application for review...