Search Results

1. Ashraf v Standing [2012] NZIACDT 55 (30 August 2012) [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...difficult exercise of judgment, to be made by the tribunal as an informed and expert body on all the facts of the case. [30] As a Full Court observed in McDonald v Canterbury District Law Society (High Court, Wellington, M 215/87, 10 August 1989, Eichelbaum CJ, Heron and Ellis JJ) at p 12: 8 Even in the absence of dishonesty, striking-off will be appropriate where there has been a serious breach of a solicitor’s fundamental duties to his client. [31] It is important...

2. Ali v Wang [2015] NZIACDT 50 (13 May 2015) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...difficult exercise of judgment, to be made by the tribunal as an informed and expert body on all the facts of the case. [30] As a Full Court observed in McDonald v Canterbury District Law Society (High Court, Wellington, M 215/87, 10 August 1989, Eichelbaum CJ, Heron and Ellis JJ) at p 12: Even in the absence of dishonesty, striking-off will be appropriate where there has been a serious breach of a solicitor’s fundamental duties to his client. [31] It is important to bear in mind t...

3. [2014] NZEmpC 231 Premier Events Group Ltd and Anor v Beattie and Ors [pdf, 685 KB]

   ...written memoranda filed on 17 May and 1 June 2012 (Heard at Auckland) Appearances: AJ Lloyd and V Hodgson, counsel for Premier Events Group Limited D Neutze and N Lord, counsel for BA Partners Limited (in liquidation and receivership) J Eichelbaum, counsel for Malcolm James Beattie, Anthony Joseph Regan and Patricia Panapa Judgment: 17 December 2014 JUDGMENT OF CHIEF JUDGE G L COLGAN A Premier Events Group Limited’s claims against Malcolm Beatt...

4. [2017] NZEmpC 94 Crimson Consulting Ltd v Berry [pdf, 268 KB]

   ...which it may be inferred that the Court of Appeal did not consider there was a material divergence of views. [85] There was one other post Erceg judgment of the Court of Appeal to which reference should be made. In Joint Action Funding Ltd v Eichelbaum, the Court when fixing a timetable as to whether a suppression order should be made, directed the parties to explain “… why a suppression order is warranted in light of the 43...

5. Auckland Standards committee 2 v Burcher Short [2015] NZLCDT 47 [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...[78] While there was also a ground advanced as to family members sharing the same name, we noted in our interim decision that was given little weight. That is really the only ground remaining and we consider, having regard to the decision in Eichelbaum that it is insufficient in the present matter to displace the starting point of openness contained in s 240 of the LCA. There is simply insufficient evidence to justify a finding that the interests of the practitioners and their fami...

6. Khan v Khetarpal [2016] NZIACDT 6 (22 January 2016) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...difficult exercise of judgment, to be made by the tribunal as an informed and expert body on all the facts of the case. [30] As a Full Court observed in McDonald v Canterbury District Law Society (High Court, Wellington, M 215/87, 10 August 1989, Eichelbaum CJ, Heron and Ellis JJ) at p 12: Even in the absence of dishonesty, striking-off will be appropriate where there has been a serious breach of a solicitor’s fundamental duties to his client. [31] It is important to bear in mind t...

7. Chand and Kumari v Prakash [2012] NZIACDT 85 (3 December 2012) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...8 judgment, to be made by the tribunal as an informed and expert body on all the facts of the case. [30] As a Full Court observed in McDonald v Canterbury District Law Society (High Court, Wellington, M 215/87, 10 August 1989, Eichelbaum CJ, Heron and Ellis JJ) at p 12: Even in the absence of dishonesty, striking-off will be appropriate where there has been a serious breach of a solicitor’s fundamental duties to his client. [31] It is important to bear in mind tha...

8. J v Khetarpal [2016] NZIACDT 7 (22 January 2016) [pdf, 243 KB]

   ...difficult exercise of judgment, to be made by the tribunal as an informed and expert body on all the facts of the case. [30] As a Full Court observed in McDonald v Canterbury District Law Society (High Court, Wellington, M 215/87, 10 August 1989, Eichelbaum CJ, Heron and Ellis JJ) at p 12: Even in the absence of dishonesty, striking-off will be appropriate where there has been a serious breach of a solicitor’s fundamental duties to his client. 9 [31] It is important to...

9. Reid v Fire Services and Crown Law (Recall Application) [2012] NZHRRT 27 [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...[it] thinks fit”) that a re-hearing is not a matter of procedure. It is a significant aspect of jurisdiction and the power to regulate procedure cannot be used to increase jurisdiction. See Browne v Minister of Immigration [1990] NZAR 67, 69-70 (Eichelbaum CJ). To similar effect see Akewushola v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2000] 2 All ER 148 (CA) at 153j where Sedley LJ, delivering the judgment of the Court, stated: For my part I do not think that, slips apart, a sta...

10. [2021] NZREADT 52 - QH v KE, SE & Agency (14 October 2021) [pdf, 299 KB]

    ...2021, QH responded to the objection to the introduction of further evidence, notably the first page of the valuation report. He says that at the start of the process, he was told to provide the bare minimum of evidence 16 Nottingham, above n 8; Eichelbaum v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 303) [2016] NZREADT 3 at [47]–[52]; Moseley v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 1907) [2021] NZREADT 19 at [59]. 17 to prove that the advertising was false. He now knows that he needs...