Search Results

1. Registrar of IAA v Ho [2019] NZIACDT 54 (31 July 2019) [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...[2017] NZHC 376 at [93]. 5 Section 50. 6 Section 51(1). 7 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151] (citation omitted). 8 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee, above n 7, at [97], [101]–[102] & [112]. 8 [42] The Tribunal has received from the Registrar the statement of complaint, dated 6 December 2017, with supporting documents. [43] Ms Ho filed a statement of reply, dated 3 January 2018, with supporting...

2. KXBK v GVH [2019] NZIACDT 74 (1 November 2019) [pdf, 195 KB]

   ...Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal [2017] NZHC 376 at [93]. 8 Section 50. 9 Section 51(1). 10 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151] (citation omitted). 11 Z, above n 10, at [97], [101]–[102] & [112]. 11 [62] The adviser requests an oral hearing, but given the outcome the Tribunal does not require the appearance of any person.12 The complaint will be determined on the papers. ASSESSMENT [63] The Registr...

3. LCRO 55/2020 MY v KA (5 October 2020) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...(disregard for Mr KA’s instructions) is captured by its finding that Mr MY had breached r 3 of the Rules by failing to respond to those instructions in a timely way. In a sense therefore, there is an element of duplication across those findings. [101] However, the Committee also said that r 11 of the Rules was infringed by Mr MY because of his responses to the Committee’s attempts to resolve the matter, and that this conduct reflected poorly on the legal profession. [102] I hav...

4. Baker v Hemana - Tataraakina C (2020) 87 Takitimu MB 100 (87 TKT 100) [pdf, 277 KB]

   ...24 December 2020 TE WHAKATAUNGA Ā KAIWHAKAWĀ MATUA ISAAC Judgment of Chief Judge W W Isaac Copies to: L Watson, Barrister and Solicitor, 342 Gloucester Street, Taradale, Napier 4112, leo@leowatson.co.nz 87 Tākitimu MB 101 Hei tīmatanga kōrero – Introduction [1] On 23 June 2020 Mr Nigel Baker applied to the Court for an injunction preventing any further damage and injury to Tataraakina C block and associated wāhi tapu sites located on the whenua...

5. TSO v Essina [2020] NZIACDT 2 (16 January 2020) [pdf, 117 KB]

   ...[2017] NZHC 376 at [93]. 4 Section 50. 5 Section 51(1). 6 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151] (citation omitted). 7 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee, above n 6, at [97], [101]–[102] & [112]. 11 2009, the Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 and any applicable regulations. Advisers 29. A licensed immigration adviser must not misrepresent or promote in a false, fraudulent or deceptive manner:...

6. NLT v Coetzee [2019] NZIACDT 81 (10 December 2019) [pdf, 144 KB]

   ...[2017] NZHC 376 at [93]. 6 Section 50. 7 Section 51(1). 8 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151] (citation omitted). 9 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee, above n 8, at [97], [101]–[102] & [112]. 11 ASSESSMENT [56] The Registrar relies on the following provisions of the Code: General 1. A licensed immigration adviser must be honest, professional, diligent and respectful and conduct themselves with...

7. [2021] NZEmpC 155 Best Health Foods Ltd v Berea [pdf, 290 KB]

   ...its challenge. [100] Having regard to the effect of s 183 of the Act, the effect of which is that this decision replaces the Authority’s determination, I confirm the remedies that were awarded by the Authority, as set out at [23] above. [101] I reserve costs. Normally these follow the event. That would mean that any costs which the Court is able to recognise for the purposes of an application for costs under the Guideline Scale as to Costs could be sought by Ms Berea as the su...

8. [2021] NZEmpC 168 Juyi International Ltd v Pan [pdf, 283 KB]

   ...may have been filed. [99] Mr Pan’s challenge is also dismissed. [100] Pursuant to s 183(2) of the Act, the Authority’s determination on the issues I have reviewed is set aside and this judgment replaces it in those respects. [101] I reserve costs. Given the mixed outcome, it may be appropriate for costs to lie where they fall. However, if either party chooses to seek a contribution to costs incurred, they may do so within 28 days, with a response given 14 days ther...

9. [2021] NZEmpC 93 Gestro v Relph [pdf, 287 KB]

   ...the sole trustee. [100] That LITC Ltd may have paid Ms Gestro wages is not, when compared with the range of other factors I have reviewed, sufficient to establish that this particular entity was in reality Ms Gestro’s employer. Result [101] A declaration is sought against Mr Relph personally. He says he acted as trustee of the Trust. That may be so, but that could not be an impediment to the grant of a declaration against Mr Relph personally. [102] It is well es...

10. LCRO 107/2021 NG v WF and OE (29 September 2021) [pdf, 176 KB]

    ...settlement proposal has caused that to occur. 15 [100] Indeed, the nature of some of that correspondence would suggest a degree of tension between the NG siblings which, I perceive, has substantially delayed matters being resolved. Ms OE [101] Ms OE had no involvement in the estate administration file, and seems to have randomly been sent the 6 November 2020 email containing the settlement proposal. On receiving it Ms OE noted that the partner with responsibility for the m...