Search Results

1. HR v OW and CT LCRO 79/2014 (18 May 2015) [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...spend in preparing his report. He says he provided his expert opinion to the lawyers, and it was instrumental in them settling the clients’ proceeding after mediation on 3 February 2011. [19] Mr HR provided copies of correspondence, evidence filed in the debt recovery proceeding, and the settlement agreement. The evidence traversed the initial instructions, Mr HR’s various requests for information held by the lawyers as his investigation progressed, and Ms OW’s careful man...

2. Waitangi Tribunal - issue 57 of Te Manutukutuku [pdf, 571 KB]

   ...required by the claims process to effectively par- ticipate throughout. The hapü have also formed a new claims committee Te Röpü Whenua, comprising three members from both former claims. They will ensure their claims are particularised and filed as required by the Tribunal under the new approach. This agreement is of importance not just to Ngäi Tumapühia-ä-rangi Hapü, but to the wider claimant community in the Wairarapa ki Tararua inquiry district, as the reso- lution ens...

3. AZ v YX LCRO 175 / 2010 (25 March 2011) [pdf, 146 KB]

   ...Corporate. 2 [3] At an Extraordinary General Meeting on 25 June 2007, AAO were instructed to proceed to prepare what was described by Mr AW (the Body Corporate representative in this complaint) as a “holding” statement of claim to be filed by 12 July 2007. The purpose of this was to stop time running and protect the Body Corporate’s position vis a vis the defendants, while the specific building issues were investigated. [4] In the process, and subsequently, members of...

4. LCRO 41/2015 CL v JW and IB (26 June 2018) [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...sustain the caveat. [19] Having received yet further advice from Mr JW, Mr CL instructed the lawyers to oppose GMY’s application. Ms WX did not file evidence in relation to receipt or non- disclosure to Mr CL of GMY’s email. Mr CL, however, filed evidence in support of his application which incorporated Ms WX’s explanation of her involvement in the matter. Mr CL said he had “been advised” on two key matters. First, he set out the advice he was given (by Mr JW and Ms W...

5. LCRO 160/2017 EH v FP (23 April 2018) [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...and questions the validity of decisions made by the trustees” including “the validity of their appointments” the proper course for Mr EH “is an application to the courts”. Application for review [26] In his application for review filed on [date], Mr EH seeks: (a) an admission from Mr FP that [Mr FP] “misrepresented himself as a legal trustee”; and (b) recusal by Mr FP from any further involvement with the trust without “waiv[ing] the right of any of the benef...

6. Piper v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 408) & Ors [2017] NZREADT 32 [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...his prime concern was that the Committee directed publication of its decisions. The Tribunal referred Mr Piper to paragraph 5.1 of the penalty decision, in which the Committee stated that the decision would be published “after the period for filing an appeal has ended, unless the Tribunal receives an application for an order preventing publication”. Mr Piper accepted that he had not applied for an order for non-publication. Accordingly, the Tribunal is not required to conside...

7. Hide v Official Assignee (Confidentiality Claim) [2019] NZHRRT 1 [pdf, 302 KB]

   ...bankruptcy. He failed consistently to meet his personal taxation liabilities to the Inland Revenue Department. The Department claimed on his adjudication a total of $2,270,319.74 including penalties and use of money interest for years when Mr Henderson filed returns recording nil income and nil expenses. His companies also diverted PAYE and GST payments, for which they were legally bound to account to the Department, for their own purposes. Mr Henderson was responsible for this corporate m...

8. LCRO 176/2019 LJ v RY and PG (7 July 2020) [pdf, 230 KB]

   ...6 Mr LJ, email to Lawyers Complaints Service (20 August 2018). 7 Complaint at part 3. 8 Mr LJ considers that the time recorded was inaccurate. 4 5. The quality of the job [was] poor. The job seem very rushed out. 6. Many documents were filed after the deadline and did not give [him] enough time to respon[d]. [19] The outcome sought by Mr LJ was “compensation [for] the poor services provided and wrong advice”. The Standards Committee determination [20] The Standards...

9. [2019] NZEnvC 159 Auckland Council v Noe [pdf, 826 KB]

   ...south-eastern side by the Kaipara River: this boundary appears from the titles to Mr Noe's land to be moveable. Orders Sought [3] Auckland Council's application is made underss 314(1)(a)(i) and (ii), 314(1)(b)(i), 314(1)(da) and 315(2) RMA. As filed, the Council sought the following orders: 1. Pursuant toss 320(1) and 314(1 )(a)(i) and (ii) of the RMA, the Respondent is to immediately cease: (a) bringing any fill materials onto the property; and (b) any soil disturbance...

10. LCRO 70/2018 AR v NM (10 April 2019) [pdf, 212 KB]

    ...Mrs AR’s request for directions, the Committee explained that its role was to consider and determine complaints about a lawyer’s conduct, “not to provide legal advice” as requested by Mrs AR. 5 Application for review [27] Mrs AR filed her application for review with this Office on 3 May 2018. She seeks (a) a “reprimand” for Mrs NM in respect of [Mrs NM’s] “unprofessional dealings” carrying out Mr AR’s instructions, and (b) withdrawal of the Notice of Cla...