Search Results

1. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee v Willi [2012] NZLCDT 16 [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...element of intentionally misleading the bank has been removed. Procedure [7] Shortly after these matters were uncovered in 2008 Ms Williams swore an affidavit of her own volition, having had legal advice, but without the benefit of any of her files for reference. In that affidavit she acknowledges that she made “... serious errors which may draw me into the realms of professional misconduct ...”. She referred to her investment company which had been involved in some of the...

2. CAC406 v Scheirlinck & Anor [2015] NZREADT 92 [pdf, 155 KB]

   ...In reaching the conclusion the Tribunal have taken into account the following material: 1. The bank statements. 6 2. The contemporaneous written material, namely the statements given to the investigator in March 2014. 3. The file note written by Mr Carey Smith in February 2014. 4. The letters written by the parties to the Investigator. 5. Our assessment of the evidence that was given by Mr Scheirlinck and Mr El-Ghalayini at the hearing. We find that: 1....

3. CAC304 v Drever [2016] NZREADT 27 [pdf, 163 KB]

   ...for the Tribunal to consider the facts in order to judge whether or not there is any similarity in the evidence between each of the diverse particulars to see if they suggest a common course of conduct. The Tribunal has the statements of evidence filed by the Complaints Assessment Committee. The first complaint by Mr and Mrs Deyermond arises out of a sale in early 2013. The allegations made by the complainants are around Mr Drever’s conduct in managing the sale process and alleged fa...

4. [2013] NZEmpC 224 Lyttelton Port Co Ltd v Rail & Maritime Union [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...defendants were not “Cargo Handlers” was never viable. The proceeding was also in the nature of a test case. That is not, however, a final view and I am open to persuasion. If the Company wishes to seek an order for costs, a memorandum should be filed and served within 20 working days after the date of this decision. The defendants will then have 15 working days in which to respond. A A Couch Judge Signed at 9.00 am on 3 December 2013.

5. T v G LCRO 29 / 2009 (21 April 2009) [pdf, 29 KB]

   ...consented to this matter being considered without a formal hearing and therefore in accordance with s 206(2) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act this matter is being determined on the material made available to this office by the parties and the file of the Standards Committee. Background [5] Client T sought to bring an action relating to the failure of the Wellington District Law Society to issue him with a certificate of character which was required in a standard applica...

6. AP v RE LCRO 322/2012 (22 August 2014) [pdf, 58 KB]

   ...where the means of fulfilment are within their complete control, as opposed to being partly dependent upon the acts or omissions of a third party outside the lawyer's control. For example, a lawyer should not give an undertaking regarding the filing of documents in a court or the swearing of an affidavit by the client unless the documents are in the lawyer's possession or the affidavit was being sworn at the time of giving the undertaking. Any such undertaking should be made s...

7. Brownlie v Brown - Pipituangi A Trust [2011] Maori Appellate Court MB 271 (2011 APPEAL 271) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...the Maori Land Court returned the partition application to Mr Hovell’s lawyers because it did not comply with the Māori Land Court Rules 1994. On 4 November 2008 Mr Hovell’s solicitor advised the lower Court that the application had been filed by accident. [9] On 11 December 2007 the number of active trustees was reduced to two because both Mrs McConnell and Evelyn Jones had resigned. [10] The Brownlies applied under s 238 for enforcement of obligations against the current...

8. VK & VI v AC LCRO 268-269 / 2011 & 105 / 2012 (13 May 2013) [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...Complaints Service by letter dated 2 October 2011, in which he commented on the response from Messrs AC and AD and requested the Complaints Service to treat his email as his own complaint against Mr AC. The Complaints Service then opened a new file for the complaint by Mr VI and sent Mr VI’s email to Mr AC for response. 2 [4] The Complaints Service progressed the complaints from Mr VK and Mr VI together as they related to the same issues and both complaints were considered...

9. Kavyu-Munalula v Standing [2012] NZIACDT 45 (24 August 2012) [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...advance that he has not earned. [6] Mr Standing was notified by the Tribunal that the evidence in support of the complaint could justify the complaint being upheld. He was asked under the Tribunal’s statutory powers to provide information from his files and answer questions. He did not do so, and has not been compelled to do so as the information before the Tribunal is sufficient to uphold the complaint without further evidence. [7] The Tribunal has upheld the complaint. The Comp...

10. BC and SO v SH [2012] NZIACDT 63 (28 September 2012) [pdf, 108 KB]

    ...Technician’. She advised that Mr SO’s designated occupation of ‘Electrical Engineering Technician’ was confirmed as a Level 7, and of the need to claim bonus points in order to lodge without an offer of employment.” [20] Ms DZ assigned Ms SH to the file, and provided instructions, saying: “Mr SO will be the main applicant. His English is not very good, may need to do English course. His occupation is that of Electrical Engineering Technician. Please review qualifications...