Search Results

1. [2013] NZEmpC 113 Talent Bean Ltd t/a Roasted Addiqtion Cafe v D'Souza [pdf, 116 KB]

   ...because the legislation contemplates that the subs (3) tests are minimum standards but that there may be (and often will be) other factors 2 [2011] NZEmpC 160, (2011) 9 NZELR 40. 3 [2012] NZEmpC 110, (2012) 10 NZELR 93. which have to be take into consideration having regard to the particular circumstances of the case. [27] In Angus the Court decided that the four considerations contained in s 103A(3) were to be seen as...

2. Reid v CAC 20002 & Cox and Cox v CAC 20002 & Reid [2013] NZREADT 68 [pdf, 61 KB]

   ...makes it clear, at para [58] and earlier of his judgment in Quin, that “Section 93(1)(f) does not empower a Committee to order a licensee to make payments in the nature of compensatory damages. That is a power which is given to the Tribunal under s.110 ...”. Section 110 only relates to our powers to make orders in a situation of misconduct of a licensee. Here we are dealing with his misconduct. [51] A penalty decision is discretionary in nature and it is for us to determine the...

3. Chalecki v ACC [2012] NZACA 16 [pdf, 67 KB]

   ...Corporation’s discretion to fix the appellant’s RE by excluding the allowances was appropriate. Costs [73] The appellant did not seek costs on the appeal, but this may have been an oversight. In any event, the Authority is empowered under s 110(1), where an appeal is allowed in whole or in part, to allow the appellant the costs of bringing the appeal or any part thereof. [74] The notice of appeal filed with the Authority was brought only against the decision of the Reviewer...

4. [2016] NZEmpC 86 Radius Residential Care Ltd v The NZ Nurses Organisation Inc [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...Ltd [1992] 3 ERNZ 305. 13 At 316. 14 New Zealand Apple and Pear Marketing Board v Master & Sons Ltd [1986] 1 NZLR 191 at 193. the peril and possibility of being convicted as a criminal': per Field J in Lamb v Munster 10 QBD 110, 111" (403). See also Blunt v Park Lane Hotel Ltd [1942] 2 KB 253. The rule extends to discovery (Triplex Safety Glass v Lancegaye Safety Glass) and to interrogatories (Taranaki Co-operative Dairy Co Ltd v Rowe [1970] NZLR 895)....

5. [2018] NZLCDT 18 National Standards Committee v Shi [pdf, 271 KB]

   ...16 above. In not facilitating the transfer of the settlement funds, via Richard Zhao Lawyers Ltd’s trust account, from Mr Y to the joint credit of the transferors (Mr X and Ms J), the practitioner breached rules 6 and 6.1 of the Rules and s 110 of the Act. (c) The Standards Committee refers to paragraphs 11 to 12 and 14 above. In acting on the authority of the authority and instruction form for the transfer of the Victoria Street Property without a base document and in entering...

6. Taurua - Estate of Piatarihi Taurua [2018] Chief Judge's MB 108 (2018 CJ 108) [pdf, 335 KB]

   ...affected by the order complained of as they are unable to build on Patukauae [A] block in the future as Ella’s shares are not there to succeed to. The applicants would like to build a family home on Patukauae A Block. 2018 Chief Judge’s MB 110 Concise history of Order sought to be amended 4. The matter was heard by the Court at 31 Bay of Islands MB 265-267 (16 July 1957), the minute is partially reproduced as follows: Matira Mitai Heinui sworn: Dec’d was my mothe...

7. Prajapati v Khetarpal [2016] NZIACDT 23 (3 May 2016) [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...Withdraw funds held on behalf of clients only when payments for fees and/or disbursements fall due; and c) Use funds held on behalf of clients only for the purpose for which they were paid to the adviser. [13] The provision is similar to section 110 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, which mandates solicitor’s trust accounts, including for fees paid in advance. The Tribunal has always made it clear the regime applying to licensed immigration advisers means advisers hold client...

8. 2021-03-15 D-G of Conservation opening subs [pdf, 246 KB]

   ...control for non-diadromous galaxias (among other matters) will result in PC7 failing, even on its limited terms, to give effect to Te Mana o te Wai. 35 Evidence in reply of Tom de Pelsemaeker at paragraph 158.  36 Transcript at p109‐110.  37 At paragraphs 11‐14.  38 Transcript at p318.  PC7 - Opening Legal Submissions for Director-General of Conservation - DOC-6603262 12 The new restricted discretionary activity 47. This is not a matter on which th...

9. Complaints Assessment Committee 302 v Crockett [2017] NZREADT 5 [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...that Mrs Crockett’s failure to make disclosure to Ms Jordan (notwithstanding being aware of the risk and the importance of making disclosure) resulted from negligence, but not serious negligence as in s 73(b) if the Act. [46] Pursuant to s 110(4) of the Act, if the Tribunal finds the alleged conduct proved, but does not consider it amounts to misconduct under s 73 of the Act, it make may a finding of unsatisfactory conduct and make orders accordingly. We consider that it is app...

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

    ...Committee’s finding that Mr MY breached r 11 of the Rules, by failing to administer his practice in a manner that preserved the reputation of the legal profession: specifically, his manner of responding to the complaint and the Committee’s inquiry. [110] Both breaches are deserving of a finding of unsatisfactory conduct, pursuant to s 12(c) of the Act. Penalties [111] The Committee censured Mr MY and ordered him to pay costs of $1,000 to the New Zealand Law Society. No othe...