Search Results

1. [2025] NZIACDT 21 – KA v Wen (5 March 2025) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal [2017] NZHC 376 at [93]. 11 Immigration Advisers Licensing Act, s 50. 12 Section 51(1). 13 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] and [151]. 14 At [97], [101]–[102] and [112]. 9 From the client [31] The client has not filed any submissions or evidence. From Immigration NZ [32] The Tribunal has not received any submissions or evidence from Immigration NZ. From the adviser...

2. LCRO 180/2022 HB v UC and JW (26 November 2024) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...complaint pursuant to s 138(1)(f) of the Act. Mr HB has an adequate remedy that it would be reasonable for him to take, namely, pursuing [Building Firm A], the vendor of the property sold to him, for breach of the warranty. Anonymised publication [101] Pursuant to s 206(4) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act, I direct that this decision be published in an anonymised format on the website of this Office. [102] I also authorise the respondents to provide a copy of this decision to Ms A...

3. Ryan v Accident Compensation Corporation (Impairment Assessment) [2025] NZACC 015 (28 January 2025) [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...examination findings with dysmetria and without evidence to support significant radiculopathy, such as wasting or loss of reflexes, the Diagnosis Related Estimate (DRE) of lumbosacral impairment according to T72, p110 and the examples of pages 101 – 103, fits category two, which gives an impairment of 5%. [26] Dr Kanji then considered apportionment and stated– Based on surgery in 2013 to address lytic spondylolisthesis plus L4/5 disc degeneration and right radiculopathy, w...

4. LCRO 78/2023 CQ v KV (20 May 2025) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...borrowing had been reduced, which Ms HW would not have contributed to.27 [100] A discussion between Mr CQ and a lawyer instructed by Ms KV would likely have exposed the unfair nature of the proposed arrangement and provided some protection for her. [101] I agree with the Committee, when it describes Mr CQ’s failings as ‘serious’.28 26 Wellington Standards Committee 2 v Harper [2020] NZLCDT 29. 27 The amount of rental paid by Ms HW is unknown. 28 Standards Committee determi...

5. Linstead v Tohu - Te Horo 3 No 1-31 (2024) 276 Taitokerau MB 273 (276 TTK 273) [pdf, 289 KB]

   ...rehearing and interim injunction applications. I was minded to dismiss this ground because of that omission. [100] However, counsel for the applicant, and respondent made submissions addressing this issue, therefore I propose to deal with it. [101] Mr Linstead says that the Trust by their words and/or conduct created a belief or expectation that his whānau would be able to partition out the Kaikou 3 Lot B9B2 and they have relied on that representation from the trustees. [102] He...

6. X Ltd v Q Ltd [2024] NZDT 261 (14 March 2024) [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...one party to a contract agreeing to release the other from its liability otherwise arising at law, although that same degree of improbability does not apply to a limitation clause (Ailsa Craig Fishing Co Ltd v Malvern Fishing Co Ltd [1983] 1 All ER 101 at p 105 per Lord Fraser and SGS (NZ) Ltd v Quirke Export Ltd [1988] 1 NZLR 52 at pp 55 – 56 per Cooke P). (g) However, “these events” referred to in that statement resulted from an oral contract in which there was no effective inc...

7. 2024 NZPSPLA 093.pdf [pdf, 315 KB]

   ...and in particular are employing persons to provide restricted security services who do not have a COA to do so, the penalty is likely to be stricter. Suppression [100] Pursuant to section 96C of the Act this decision will be published. [101] Ms AL should not be penalised for the bringing of this complaint, accordingly her details are to be redacted. [102] I also do not find that the publication of the respondents’ details proportionate to the findings. The guards were work...

8. [2024] NZEnvC 246 Noakes v Waikato District Council [pdf, 501 KB]

   ...report on the subdivision rules, which was prepared prior to the release of the new formatting, are split across the decisions for each zone (Decision Reports 14-27: Zones). 11 Decision Report 13: Infrastructure at [99]. 12 Ibid, at [100]-[101]. 13 Waikato District Council decisions on submissions – Submitter: Anna Noakes, Submission number: 524. 5 Original Appeal and Amended Notice of Appeal [9] Noakes lodged an appeal against the decisions version of the PDP regardi...

9. LCRO 158/2024 USP v FTC (30 June 2025) [pdf, 524 KB]

   ...systematic in identifying a “step by step” approach to the frequently difficult task of determining an appropriate penalty, prudently cautions that “penalty decisions in the professional disciplinary context are inherently case specific”.9 [101] The Law Society guidelines suggest a three-tiered approach to determining the nature and gravity of the relevant conduct: (a) conduct which is of a low-level nature in terms of seriousness (in comparison to other cases involving...

10. LCRO 151/2023 OA v HF and MT (22 July 2025) [pdf, 240 KB]

    ...reports on a regular basis. It is reasonable that a member of the public who had instructed a professional to act for them on a purchase, would expect that professional to draw their attention to any potential issues with the content of the LIM. [101] In this case, compliance with the standard expected would have needed Ms HF to recognise that a building consent was required and was not recorded in the LIM. It also needed Ms HF to note that a certificate of acceptance was required by...