• If you are looking for a specific decision with a forward slash in the title (eg, 123/2014), you will need to replace the forward slash with a space (eg, 123 2014), as the website cannot pick up on forward slashes (/) or any other characters.
  • If you are doing a keyword search (eg, sanction), please note that this search will only produce decisions where the keyword appears in the title or decision description. If you want to search the entire decision document for certain keywords, you will need to use full website search located in the top right hand corner of this page.
  • If you want to search for a specific section of the Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 or clause of the Code of Conduct 2014, you must search it as one word with no spaces or brackets. For example, if searching for section 44(2)(a) of the Act, you should enter ‘s442a’ into the keyword search and if searching for clause 19(k) of the Code of Conduct, you should enter ‘cl19k’.

If you want to search for a decision from a particular jurisdiction using the full website search, put both the jurisdiction name and the keyword in the search field (eg, Immigration Advisors Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal sanction).

Search results for offshore.

12 items matching your search terms

  1. [2022] NZIACDT 1 - ZI v Wan (19 January 2022) [PDF, 208 KB]

    Diligence and due care / client breached visa conditions by travelling offshore twice without their child while holding a guardian visitor visa / visa required that client live with their child in NZ / first trip involved a family emergency / adviser failed to lodge a separate variation application, instead relying on immigration officer’s failure to object while questioning departure / second trip was to gather evidence for residence visa application / adviser failed to inform client that INZ refused a temporary exemption to visa condition, or warn of consequences of departing in breach / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1 / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s442 / breach of cl1 found / adviser accepts he should have made formal variation application, and should have informed client of adverse decision and advised of risks and options / complaint upheld

  2. [2021] NZIACDT 25 – RH v Ji (8 November 2021) [PDF, 211 KB]

    Dishonest behaviour / adviser deliberately misled INZ and the IAA / conflict of interest / numerous breaches of obligations / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s 442 / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1, cl5, cl7a, cl17a, cl17b, cl17c, cl18b, cl19l, cl22, cl31a / adviser did not engage with Tribunal / blamed an unknown offshore adviser and translation mistake for past false information / actually had a business relationship with that adviser, and was told false information was deliberate / acted without disclosing actual conflict of interest / could not objectively explain false information given business relationship / failed to send client the INZ response letter before and immediately after submitting it / failed to explain significant matters in written agreement & provide complaints procedure & summary of professional responsibilities / unintentionally failed to provide invoice / declined to consider whether advisers have wider obligation, outside of resolving client’s situation, to…

  3. [2021] NZIACDT 22 – TC v Registrar of Immigration Advisers (3 September 2021) [PDF, 141 KB]

    Negligence / appeal against Registrar rejecting complaint / adviser in error in advising that residence application could be made offshore / corrected error before application deadline ended but complainant already departed NZ / adviser failed to satisfactorily apologise / Registrar rejected complaint on basis it disclosed trivial or inconsequential matters / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s 442, s451, s54 / Code of Conduct 2014, cl 1 / not accepted error caused loss of the chance of residence / adviser discovered mistake after appellant left NZ but before his planned resignation from employment / appellant could have returned to NZ / Registrar has discretion in deciding to pursue complaints / disciplinary threshold not reached / adviser eventually gave correct advice before it was too late, and refunded fee and other costs / failure to satisfactorily apologise thoughtless rather than deliberate, could not justify formal disciplinary process / appeal rejected.

  4. [2021] NZIACDT - 12 EM v Yong (3 June 2021) [PDF, 164 KB]

    Rubber stamping / permitting unlicensed employees to perform immigration work / adviser failed to engage with complainant & had his staff communicate with them / closely supervised staff / operated offshore / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s7, s44 / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1, cl2a, cl2e, cl3c / conduct not negligent or lacking due care / deliberate but not knowingly a breach of the Code / adviser failed to personally maintain relationship of confidence and trust or provide advice / failed to obtain and carry out instructions / failed to conduct himself in accordance with Act / complaint upheld

  5. [2020] NZIACDT 29 - Immigration New Zealand (Carley) v Penty (6 July 2020) [PDF, 119 KB]

    Sanctions decision / rubber stamping / adviser took over arrangement with offshore company to provide immigration services to Filipino workers / system encouraged clients to deal with unlicensed persons / adviser failed to engage with clients / work carried out by staff amounted to immigration advice / previous complaint upheld regarding same arrangement / lack of written agreement with client / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s50, s51 / rubber stamping a serious professional violation / adviser’s conduct not deliberate / adviser misunderstood scope of clerical work / adviser failed to engage with clients even after complaint had been made / misconduct continued after warning from INZ / adviser no longer licensed / financial penalties involve punishment but also deterrence / misconduct serious & systemic / adviser censured & ordered to pay $5000 penalty.

  6. [2020] NZIACDT 21 - Immigration New Zealand (Carley) v Penty (18 May 2020) [PDF, 169 KB]

    Rubber stamping / allowing unlicensed persons to provide immigration advice / adviser took over arrangement with offshore company to provide immigration services to Filipino workers / clients entered agreement with company which adviser did not sign / staff prepared, reviewed & compiled applications / staff assisted clients with applications & clients’ communications with staff not adviser / adviser had no contact with clients but for one initial Skype interview / previous complaint upheld regarding same arrangement / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s442 / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1, cl3c, cl18c / adviser operating system which encouraged clients to deal with unlicensed persons / adviser failed to engage with clients / not enough for adviser to inform clients about role & obligations, adviser must actually fulfil them / work carried out by staff amounted to immigration advice / adviser did not sign agreements & template agreements did not comply with code / complaint upheld.

  7. INZ (Gilray) v Croxson [2019] NZIACDT 79 (9 December 2019) Sanctions [PDF, 117 KB]

    Sanctions decision / rubber stamping / adviser had no direct communication with clients / adviser engaged by offshore immigration consultancy which had been engaged by recruiting agency in another country / adviser mistakenly believed consultancy was his client / failure to have written agreement / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1, cl2e, cl3c, cl17, cl18 / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s50, s51 / delegation of immigration advice work to unlicensed people a serious infringement / not the most egregious example of rubber stamping as adviser still compiled application and supporting documentation / not a deliberate flouting of obligations / adviser accepted wrongdoing & put in place new practices to ensure obligations met / adviser censured & ordered to pay $3000 penalty.

  8. INZ (Gilray) v Croxson [2019] NZIACDT 72 (18 October 2019) [PDF, 142 KB]

    Rubber stamping / allowing unlicensed people to manage visa application process and unlawfully delegating personal obligations to them / failure to provide clients with written agreement / adviser engaged by offshore immigration consultancy which had been engaged by recruiting agency in another country / adviser’s fee paid by consultancy / adviser had no direct communication with clients / agreement signed by consultancy not clients / all clients’ dealings with unlicensed people / adviser mistakenly believed consultancy was his client / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1, cl2e, cl3c, cl17, cl18 / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s442 / adviser had no contact with clients whatsoever & left  them to deal with unlicensed people whom he did not know / adviser admitted failure to engage with clients and having no written agreement / adviser did engage with file / quality of work not substandard & did not lack care /  complaint upheld.

  9. H v EQC and Offshore Market Placement Ltd [2019] CEIT-2019-0025 [PDF, 307 KB]

    Application / applicant claims property experienced differential settlement of foundations, interior and exterior cracking, and chimney damage due to earthquakes / referred for acceptance / Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal Act 2019, section 8 / section 9 / section 13 / section 17 / section 46 / application must meet section 8 criteria / namely: at time of damage by qualifying earthquake  applicant was property owner and property insured in applicant’s name; there is a dispute between applicant and an insurance company or Earthquake Commission (EQC) regarding damage claim; building was either residence or at least fifty per cent of building was used as a residence; and one of parties to claim is either EQC or an insurance company / proceedings in another forum will render application ineligible unless proceedings transferred to Tribunal, as per section 17(c) / applicant party to insurance claim in High Court, appealed to Court of Appeal / higher court proceedings involved same …

  10. [2013] NZEmpC 174 Udovenko v Offshore Marine Services (NZ) Ltd [PDF, 66 KB]

    Udovenko v Offshore Marine Services (NZ) Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 174 [Interlocutory Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 19 September 2013] APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND STATEMENT OF CLAIM – Amendment sought to include alleged breach of s 4 Wages Protection Act – Objection of defendant – Whether breach a “matter” before the Authority pursuant to s 179 – WPA not specifically pleaded in Authority but issue as to whether plaintiff had been correctly paid was – Whether defendant prejudiced by application due to additional preparation of evidence – If defendant requires additional time adjournment can be granted – Leave granted.

You can try using these keywords to search the whole site.