3132 items matching your search terms
DAVID SAVAGE v CAPITAL & COAST DISTRICT HEALTH BOARD NZEmpC WELLINGTON [2016] NZEmpC 83 [30 June 2016] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON [2016] NZEmpC 83 EMPC 374/2015 IN THE MATTER OF a challege to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN DAVID SAVAGE Plaintiff AND CAPITAL & COAST DISTRICT HEALTH BOARD Defendant Hearing: 18-19 April 2016 (heard at Wellington) Appearances: G O'
...as a further complaint. The Tribunal does not initiate complaints. Accordingly, any finding would only be relevant to sanctions, as a licensed immigration adviser’s response to a complaint may well have a bearing on the appropriate sanctions. [110] The second factor is that the Tribunal is required to determine facts on the balance of probabilities; however the test must be applied with regard to the gravity of the finding (Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [20...
...addition to the hourly rates; and if work did not proceed the “sign on” fee would be taken in its entirety. She said the practice had been changed. Invoices [109] Ms Yap produced copies of invoices, and said they had been sent to Ms Geldenhuys. [110] She commented on the hourly rates shown in “screenshots”, and said the accounts department had used an incorrect rate. She did not say what the rate should have been. Refund of fees [111] Ms Yap said that the invoices would be...
...visa”, and do so offshore, they are exempt from the requirement to be licensed. [109] However, it appears that Ms Scholes has regarded that as authority for Ms Rubio to act on her behalf and perform her professional duties. That is not correct. [110] That is for two reasons; the Code of Conduct requires professional services that go far beyond immigration advice in relation to student visas. It is not possible to enter a professional engagement without doing so. 11 [...
LCRO 299/2011 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of Auckland Standards Committee BETWEEN RV Applicant AND AUCKLAND STANDARDS COMMITTEE Respondent The names and indentifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. Introduction [1] In a determination dated 10 November 2011 Auckland Standards Committee determined to lay c
...confidential, privileged or contentious. The question for Mr AB was whether Mr CD had voided his right to have [Insurer] indemnify him. As it happens, Mr AB’s advice to [Insurer] was that it did have grounds to decline cover under the policy. [110] Whether Mr AB’s advice was correct as a matter of law based on the particular facts could have been argued either way. A dispute between insurer and insured was likely and foreseeable. Mr AB would have had to pick one side or th...
...conduct in relation to this transaction, as detailed above, and when viewed as a whole, would be regarded by lawyers of good standing as disgraceful and dishonourable. Once again this constitutes a finding of misconduct. 23 Issue 4 [110] Should we be wrong in determining Mr Hay was acting in a professional capacity and rather that he should be considered under s 7(1)(b)(ii), we move to consider whether his conduct would justify a finding that he is not a fit and proper...
...regulated services may still be subject to a misconduct finding under the Act: s 7(1)(b)(ii). 35 Section 6. 36 Section 6. 37 EA v BO LCRO 237/2010 (September 2011) at [1]. 38 CX v WZ LCRO 251/2010 (June 2011) at [31] to [34]. 39 Morpeth v Ramsey LCRO 110/2009 (November 2009) at [2] 18 [95] As I have already noted, whilst Mr SD acknowledges that he had acted for Ms J, no evidence has been produced that at the time she introduced Mrs LM to him she retained him to advise and ac...
...at p [90] above, that the court had considerable difficulty identifying who was managing Mr NM’s file and was clearly under the impression at one point in the proceedings, that correspondence relating to the file should be forwarded to GH. [110] Surprisingly, when Mr NM sought explanation as to why the charging order had been removed, it fell to GH to convey the troubling news to Mr NM that his judgment had been set aside. GH provided explanation for the failure to arrange an app...
...Investigatory Trust to be the Poike 8E Trust (“the trust”). That suggests to me that those voting were well aware that the reality of the situation was that a new trust order was being put in place to replace the PIT. 162 Waikato Maniapoto MB 110 [77] Clause 9 of the minutes records the outcome of an election of trustees. The PIT trustees along with two additional trustees were elected. The minutes refer back to the report to the owners dated 13 May 2017. Under the head...