Search Results

1. Update to Ministers on investment approach [pdf, 897 KB]

   ...of Police, Minister Responsible for the Serious Fraud Office Hon Simon Bridges, Associate Minister of Justice Hon Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga, Minister of Corrections Investment Approach: Update on progress and ongoing resourcing Date 21 October 2015 File reference Action Sought – Key Recommendations Timeframe/ Deadline Note the attached paper on the options for a system level measure of crime to support Social Investment - Comment on the service requirements for the upcoming R...

2. Nelson Standards Committee v Bamford [2015] NZLCDT 39 [pdf, 33 KB]

   ...features. Mitigating Factors [17] We consider the mitigating features to be as follows. Firstly the practitioner immediately acknowledged his error and expressed his regret. He has been cooperative with the disciplinary process and, following the filing of amended charges reducing the previous misconduct charges to unsatisfactory conduct, he acknowledged responsibility and through his lawyer negotiated an agreed statement of facts in order to facilitate the process and minimise...

3. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee v Cooper [2015] NZLCDT 7 [pdf, 49 KB]

   ...his breath. That charge was laid in the Rotorua District Court and was first called on 15 February 2011. It was then adjourned nine times up until 9 March 2012. On that date the charge was adjourned to 28 May 2012 for a defended hearing. The file recorded that the respondent would be available on that date and that this was a final adjournment. The respondent failed to appear in the Rotorua District Court on that day to conduct the defended hearing on behalf of the defendant....

4. Thomas v CAC304 & Anor [2016] NZREADT 17 [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...the GST clause. Discussion [14] Because of Mr Lang’s tragic death it is not possible for the Tribunal to accept Mr Lang’s version of events and reject Mr Thomas’s in the absence of any other evidence. What we can say, from having read the file and ourselves examined the agreement for sale and purchase, is that the GST clause was completely obscured by the additional clauses 18 and 19 which were glued over the top of it. It is more likely than not that Mr Lang would have been u...

5. CAC20005 v Cui [2015] NZREADT 23 [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...sale and to obtain advice prior to auction. [d] That it was not acceptable for Ms Cui not to have read important correspondence from her vendor client regarding the property or, in the circumstances, to have failed to look at the Council property file before this was sent out to purchasers. [e] That “alarm bells should have rung” in Ms Cui’s head from the start of her sale instructions and she should have ensured that the issues with the property were fully and clearly highli...

6. Meulenbroek v Vision Antenna Systems Ltd (Costs) [2015] NZHRRT 3 [pdf, 52 KB]

   ...the Commission: (b) has facilitated or obstructed that information-gathering process: (c) has acted in a manner that facilitated the resolution of the issues that were the subject of the proceedings. [4] Because the written submissions filed by the parties are in agreement as to the principles to be applied we do not intend rehearsing those principles. We address only those matters which in our view are the main points. The Calderbank offers [5] On 15 February 2013 Vision A...

7. Kong v Li [2015] NZIACDT 59 (15 May 2015) [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...briefs of evidence or submissions, the Tribunal will issue a decision on sanctions without further notice. [22] The complainant and the Registrar may provide briefs of evidence and submissions in reply on or before 11 June 2015. [23] If Mr Li has filed briefs of evidence or submissions; an oral hearing will take place in Auckland, commencing at 10:00 am on 18 June 2015 (at a place to be notified to parties). [24] Leave is reserved to any party to vary the preceding directions. DAT...

8. G v U LCRO 14 / 2009 (12 March 2009) [pdf, 20 KB]

   ...reply to that response. She did so by letter of 16 June 2008. That letter was forwarded to Lawyer U who briefly responded to it on 7 July 2008. That letter was again provided to Complainant G for comment. She commented on it on 7 August 2008. The file was then handed to the Complaints Committee for its consideration. At some time prior to 9 September the Complaints Committee of the Wellington District Law Society considered the matter and determined to take no further action. That d...

9. BU v DG LCRO 276 / 2011 (6 November 2013) - Penalty Decision [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...Mr DG in respect of breaches of Rules 2.3, 2.7 and 2.10 of the Conduct and Client Care Rules.1 Mr DG was found to have used the complaints process for an improper purpose. This decision deals with penalty and costs now that both parties have filed submissions. [2] The details surrounding the complaint are set out in the substantive decision, which reversed the decision of the Standards Committee to take no further action pursuant to s 138(2) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 200...

10. 2017 NZSSAA 024 (6 June 2017) [pdf, 107 KB]

    ...Otago and applied to HNZ for a transfer of his housing entitlement to Dunedin. There was no question at that time as to his ongoing entitlement to the Palmerston North house. 2 [3] In August 2016 Mr XXXX became engaged and when he filed his appeal stated he was married and was awaiting the arrival of his wife in New Zealand. He now has a $25,000 scholarship from the University of Otago although at the time of his application for transfer Mr XXXX did not know that his...