Search Results

1. Auckland Standards Committee 5 v Hong [2020] NZLCDT 12 [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...following rules: (a) Rules 1.03, 1.04 and 1.07 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Barristers and Solicitors, involving conduct before 1 August 2008. (b) Rules 5, 5.1, 5.2, 5.4, 5.4.2, 5.4.3, 5.4.4, 5.4.5, 6 and 6.1 of the Conduct and Client Care Rules, and s 4(d) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Act), for conduct occurring on or after 1 August 2008. [2] The breaches of the Rules arise out of Mr Hong’s dealings with his clients D K, J D, and the CL Trust (Trust): (a)...

2. LB & QB v REAA & LI [2011] NZREADT 39 [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...covenant” in a transfer which also needed to be searched to ascertain the extent of the encumbrance. We deal separately below with the state of the title to the property. The Findings of the Authority [10] The Committee of the Authority gave careful consideration to whether the facts disclosed unsatisfactory conduct in terms of s.72 of the Act, or misconduct under s.73. We set out the following portions from the “Discussion” of the Committee: “The Committee considere...

3. LCRO 55/2017 L DA and O DA v UE [pdf, 150 KB]

   ...threats outlined in your 5th December 2016 letter is a blunt instrument and is both reprehensible and unconscionable. 3 [9] Mr DA then referred to rr 2, 2.1, 2.2 and (in bold) 2.3 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules) as being pertinent to the circumstances. [10] Having received a 23 December 2016 reply from the senior partner at [Law Firm] which they did not find satisfactory (and to which I will refer below) the DAs comp...

4. Southland Standards Committee v Evans [2011] NZLCDT 38 [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...declaration was untrue and he knew it to be untrue. He thereby failed to promote and maintain proper standards of professionalism in his dealings with a fellow lawyer, contrary to Rule 10 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care Rules) 2008 and misled and deceived a fellow lawyer contrary to Rule 11.1. Particulars (a) Mr Evans acted in the administration of the deceased estate of one K B, formerly of W, who died on 5 June 2009. In that capacity, on or sho...

5. QQ v NP LCRO 121/2012 (15 June 2015) [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...conduct under s 12(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act) against him for failing to respond to Mr NP’s enquiries in a timely manner, in contravention of rule 3.2 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the rules). The Committee ordered Mr QQ to apologise to Mr NP, and to pay $950 towards the costs and expenses of the Committee’s enquiry. Background [2] Mr QQ acted on a legal aid assignment for Mr NP dated 2 August 201...

6. Ryang v Auckland Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 21 [pdf, 282 KB]

   ...the experts agreed necessitated the home being reclad. [20] The causes of water ingress in these areas was due to inadequate jointing of the cap flashings on the parapets, cap flashings having fixings through membrane with no full membrane protection to the top of the parapet beneath the metal cap flashings, and the handrails and the balustrades fixed through the covered parapets and breaching the membrane. [21] The experts also identified a number of other construction...

7. [2017] NZEnvC 120 Housing New Zealand Corporation v Auckland Council [pdf, 1.4 MB]

   ...areas. [58] The Corporation suggested that the new objective elevated the approach to historic heritage in the special character areas from the s7(c) "maintain and enhance". Ms Rowe did not accept that. She referred to an elevated level of care, but not absolute protection, given it is protecting from what is inappropriate in terms of the significance of those values and that involves "maintain and enhance". [59] Ms Rowe noted the contrast with the direction in t...

8. BORA Employment Relations Amendment Bill [pdf, 308 KB]

   ...principal Act to specified groups of employees in situations where their employer loses a contract for services to a new contractor (subsequent contracting). This will ensure the integrity of subpart 1 of Part 6A of the principal Act in providing protection to specified employees in all change of employer situations. The nature of this protection is the right for affected employees to elect to transfer to the new employer on their existing terms and conditions of employment. 5. The Bill...

9. Hawkes Bay Standards Committee v McKay [2014] NZLCDT 57 [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...the lady”. He considered that he had been misunderstood and not fairly listened to. He regarded himself as a good person and competent lawyer and that his note of the original meeting which he contended took 55 minutes and at which he kept careful notes was the accurate version rather than that which had been found by the Tribunal on the basis of the complainant’s evidence. He did not make further submissions concerning the offending itself except that he asserted the public...

10. BORA Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill [pdf, 297 KB]

    ...following aspects of the Bill raise issues under that Act: 2.1. Clause 6, which concerns the offence of breaching bylaws against certain forms of driving, places an evidential onus on the accused and so is contrary to the presumption of innocence protected by s 25(c). In the context of those particular offences, however, I consider that the onus is justifiable. Clause 16 of the Bill adds a further ground for the impoundment of a motor vehicle for 28 days under s 96 of the Land Transport...