Search Results

1. LCRO 261/2016 TJ v DM and ZP (26 September 2019) [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...was Ms TJ’s contention that, despite incurring substantial fees, her lawyers had achieved little of value for her. [109] It was the lawyers’ view that they had achieved “an excellent outcome in exceptionally difficult circumstances”.5 [110] The gulf between Ms TJ’s view of “nothing achieved” and the lawyers’ conclusion of having an achieved an “excellent outcome” for their client, illustrates, if more was needed, the diametrically opposed views of the parties on...

2. LCRO 43/2021 CAT Ltd v ZEN Lawyers Ltd (28 October 2021) [pdf, 217 KB]

   ...BV’s conduct required a disciplinary response. [109] At first step, it presents as unusual that a lawyer of Mr BV’s seniority would embark on completing work for a client in circumstances where he had no clear instructions to do so. [110] I have noted that Mr JM’s submissions were comprehensive. They were also articulate and informed. Mr JM provides a clear and precise recollection of his meetings with Mr BV. [111] In his concluding submissions, Mr JM suggests that Mr...

3. [2021] NZEnvC 118 Drach v Tasman District Council [pdf, 2.4 MB]

   IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KOTI T AIAO O AOTEAROA K IOTAUTAHI IN THE MA TIER AND BET\'{IEEN AND AND Decision No. (2021] NZEnvC 118 of the Resource 1vfanagement Act 1991 an appeal under s120 of the Act T&L DRACH (ENV-2020-CHC-141) Appellants TASMAN DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent P & L SHIRLEY AND 1'v1OTUEKA TRUSTEE (No 2) LIMITED Applicants Court: Environment Judge J J fvI Hassan Hearing: Appearances: Date of Decision:

4. [2021] NZEmpC 139 QDA v EKD [pdf, 336 KB]

   ...[2010] NZEmpC 80 at [66]. breaches of policy had obviously occurred, Mr D had freely conceded this, and accepted the consequences. On this occasion, he held a different view. His reasons for this were not teased out or understood. [110] I am not persuaded that the conclusion Mr D should be dismissed on notice was a step that could have been taken by a fair and reasonable employer in the particular circumstances. [111] Mr D’s personal grievance is accordingly establi...

5. LCRO 27/2021 BK v RQ (27 August 2021) [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...administration), did not consider that the fee charged stood out as being excessive for the services provided. It considered the fee to be within the range that would customarily be charged in the market and locality for similar legal services. [110] Nor did the Committee agree with its assessor, that all (or most) of the attendances could or should have been carried out by a legal executive, thus attracting a lesser charge out rate. It considered that whilst some of the attendanc...

6. [2021] NZREADT 52 - QH v KE, SE & Agency (14 October 2021) [pdf, 299 KB]

   ...considered unless it is provided in its entirety. [109] QH replied on 7 September 2021 to say it is important to add the further evidence, such as the email from the clergyman, as it shows that others who consulted the agents were also misled. [110] The Tribunal finds that much of the new evidence is either irrelevant or, while conceivably relevant, is not material to the Tribunal’s assessment. Bar the two items discussed below, none of it will be considered by the Tribunal...

7. [2023] NZEmpC 74 Nelmac Ltd v Reunited Employees Assoc Inc [pdf, 339 KB]

   ...were no aspects of the litigation that might properly be seen as involving public interest.34 The company submitted that this litigation concerned private interests with no broader application than resolving the dispute between the parties. [110] Nelmac considered an award in its favour was in the public interest because: (a) that would be reflective of the general principle that costs follow the event; (b) it would support the object of the Act to attempt to reduce judicial...

8. [2022] NZIACDT 29 - EQ v McCarthy (19 December 2022) [pdf, 322 KB]

   ...obtain instructions itself. The 11th head is partially upheld. OUTCOME [109] I uphold the complaint. Mr McCarthy has breached cls 1, 2(a) and (e), 15(b), 24(c), 26(b), (e) and (f), 27(b) and 28(c) of the Code. SUBMISSIONS ON SANCTIONS [110] As the complaint has been upheld, the Tribunal may impose sanctions pursuant to s 51 of the Act. 23 Code of Conduct 2014, cls 18(d), 19(e). 22 [111] A timetable is set out below. Any request that Mr McCarthy undertake traini...

9. June-2023-Notification-of-Applications-in-Office-of-Chief-Registrar-20230413.pdf [pdf, 402 KB]

   ...Application to the Chief Judge to amend orders of the Court A20100008782 45/93 Te Ata Piripi CJ 2010/41 - Te Pare Piripi or Pare Piripi - and succession orders made at 42 Mercer MB 274 dated 11 March 1964 - Application to the Chief Judge A20100011029 45/93 Iwi Courtney CJ 2010/52 - Ohuirua No.2 - and an easement order made at 74 Whangarei MB 93-94 on 29 January 1993 - Application to the Chief Judge A20100011859 45/93 Hirini Pakia Manihera (Jnr) CJ 2010/85 - Motatau 3P, Motatau 5...

10. MLC Applications April 2023 [pdf, 453 KB]

    ...Application to the Chief Judge to amend orders of the Court A20100008782 45/93 Te Ata Piripi CJ 2010/41 - Te Pare Piripi or Pare Piripi - and succession orders made at 42 Mercer MB 274 dated 11 March 1964 - Application to the Chief Judge A20100011029 45/93 Iwi Courtney CJ 2010/52 - Ohuirua No.2 - and an easement order made at 74 Whangarei MB 93-94 on 29 January 1993 - Application to the Chief Judge A20100011859 45/93 Hirini Pakia Manihera (Jnr) CJ 2010/85 - Motatau 3P, Motatau 5...