Search Results

1. CE v DT LCRO 281 / 2011 (30 September 2013) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...decision have been changed. DECISION Introduction [1] The Standards Committee made a finding of unsatisfactory conduct against lawyer CE (the Practitioner) by reason of his failing to have provided his client, DT (the Respondent), with information in keeping with his obligations under Chapter 3 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules). This concerned his failure to have provided the Respondent with a Letter of Engagement....

2. Andrews v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to appeal to the High Court) [2025] NZACC 45 (10 March 2025) [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...[15] Meanwhile, Mr Andrews sought advice from Mr Boyle, Orthopaedic Surgeon. Mr Boyle filed an assessment report and treatment plan (ARTP) requesting surgery funding in January 2021. The ARTP referenced the March 2005 accident. [16] The surgery requested was considered by Dr Fong, Principal Clinical Advisor. On 4 February 2021, the Corporation approved surgery funding. At that stage, cover was updated to cover biceps tendinitis, a glenoid labrum tear, and a closed fracture of the...

3. Needham v Accident Compensation Corporation (Binding effect of review decision) [2023] NZACC 146 [pdf, 271 KB]

   ...cover for an infection following hip replacement surgery on 10 August 2012. The date of the treatment injury is 21 August 2014, which is the date that Mrs Needham sought treatment for the symptoms of the treatment injury. [7] In 2015, Mrs Needham requested ACC funded assistance for the boiler system at her home. In her letter of 20 July 2015, she said she was unable to lift the 20 kilogram bags of wood pellets up to chest height to load into the hopper. She said that the costs of...

4. DK & EK v S Ltd [2024] NZDT 359 (27 March 2024) [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...claim that their contract did not include a term limiting the liability. 21. That is because the terms of a contract are set at the beginning of the contract and cannot be introduced part way through the transaction. In my view the contract was formed at the point S Ltd accepted DK and EK’s request to come and inspect the property. 22. Given DK and EK only received the term limiting liability after this (ie once they received the report) it did not form part of their contractual a...

5. [2018] NZEmpC 88 Lorigan v Infinity Automotive Ltd [pdf, 321 KB]

   ...the other. [13] On 14 April 2009, an IEA was signed between Perry’s and Mr Lorigan, backdated so as to be effective from 24 March 2009. As will be discussed later, Mr Lorigan pleaded that this document was signed under duress, and he now informs the Court that he considers it to be void. [14] On 31 May 2009, Perry’s amalgamated under Part 13 of the Companies Act 1993 (the CA) with two other companies in the Sime Darby Group. The evidence is that as a consequence of the am...

6. Bridge v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 409) and Edwards [2018] NZREADT 61 [pdf, 312 KB]

   ...vendors on 6 May 2016. She referred to the hole in the chip heater flue, the lack of hot water in the laundry, and the garage spouting (describing it as “buggered”). She did not refer to the fence. [7] On 9 May, Mr Bridge’s solicitors requested a price reduction of $7,500 from the vendors’ solicitors: … Our client put in an offer on a “sight unseen” basis, relying upon representations by the agent. A building report has identified that the property is not concr...

7. Wolverhampton v Shaftesbury LCRO 145 / 2009 (23 June 2010) [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...been posted nor had it been placed in an envelope. The Standards Committee informed the Practitioner accordingly. [4] The Practitioner wrote again to the Standards Committee on 15 June 2009 challenging the truthfulness of the Applicant‟s claim that she did not know how the document came to be in her letter box. He contended that she had found the document among her papers and had herself placed it there. He reiterated his earlier stance that the Applicant had the document a...

8. Waitangi Tribunal - Part 5 Te Urewera [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...the Crown over ownership of lakes ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 20 .4 .2 What was the Crown’s response to the Maori claims for legal ownership of the lake ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 20 .4 .3 What w...

9. Holt & Ors as Trustees of the Kahala Trust v Auckland Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 15 [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...saddle flashings. Therefore they considered the membrane installer was required to ensure weathertightness by using upstands at various junctions. The junctions between the waterproofing membrane and the block work were in their opinion poorly formed and this resulted in water Page | 6 infiltrating deck areas at the junction of the membrane and column upstand. [13] Both Mr Nevill and Mr Maiden also agreed that the membrane installer had not complied with the require...

10. AU v ACC (Personal Injury) [2024] NZACC 098 [pdf, 466 KB]

    ...June 2024 Held at: Wellington by AVL Appearances: The Appellant is self-represented J Sumner for the Accident Compensation Corporation (“the Corporation”) Judgment: 12 June 2024 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE P R SPILLER [Claims for personal injury - ss 20, 25, 26, Accident Compensation Act 2001 (“the Act”)] Introduction [1] This is an appeal from the decision of a Reviewer dated 12 June 2023. The Reviewer dismissed applications for review of: 2...