Search Results

1. CAC306 v Zhou & Anor [2016] NZREADT 12 [pdf, 212 KB]

   ...Zhou’s “boss” as they both used that term, and that Mr Zhou was led by Mr She in terms of the offending; although the said series of 10 false rental appraisals were entirely the business and offending of Mr Zhou. [55] The DVD recording was filed by Mr Zhou on 28 October 2015 and was not part of the evidence at the substantive hearing before us. [56] If counsel for Mr Zhou is submitting that he has not received natural justice in terms of procedures, such a review concept is no...

2. Hunstanton v Gretna LCRO 27 / 2010 (13 July 2010) [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...a number of people within the firm. Their charge-out rates differed from $180 per hour to $250 per hour. These hourly rates were referred to by Mr YY in his report. This was a proper reflection of the attributes of the lawyers who worked on the file and no further adjustment was necessary. The reasonable costs of running a practice [46] While this matter will be of relevance to the setting of any fee, it does not require special consideration in this case. Any fee agreement ente...

3. TE v Wellington Standards Committee LCRO 100/2010, 92/2011, 153/2012 (1 February 2013) [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...the definitions in section 7(1)(a) require that the conduct takes place at a time when the lawyer is providing regulated services. I accept TF’s submission that there is nothing in the Standards Committee determination or any material on the file that indicates that section 7(1)(b) has any relevance to the determination. [46] In Shrewsbury v Rothesay, the LCRO discussed the provisions in Australian jurisdictions parallel to the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act and also considered th...

4. Reihana-Ngatote - Okahu 1, 3B2B2A, 3B2B2C, 3B2B2D, 4A, 4B, 4D, 4C1, 4C2, 3A3B2A (2016) 132 Taitokerau MB 120 (132 TTK 120) [pdf, 232 KB]

   ...met but the responsible trustees could not agree on that point. There was then a split amongst the four responsible trustees as to whether they should meet separately from the advisory trustees or together. Also, during this period Mr Mahoney filed an appeal against my 9 March 2015 decision, and this may have added to the responsible trustees’ inertia. 5 Far North District Council – Okahu 3B2B2 (2015) 97 Taitokerau MB 234 (97...

5. Bullent v Standing [2012] NZIACDT 54 (30 August 2012) [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...of business and has been dishonest throughout.” The response [30] Mr Standing’s response to the complaint was an email dated 20 December 2011, addressed to the Authority. The email states: “As per previous complaints, I do not hold the files for these applicants and therefore [I am] not in a position to comment in any great detail. However, I can state that to the best of my knowledge there was never [any] misleading information given nor was I ever incompetent or in breach o...

6. Hunstanton v Cambourne and Chester LCRO 167 / 2009 (10 February 2010) [pdf, 71 KB]

   ...a number of people within the firm. Their charge-out rates differed from $180 per hour to $250 per hour. These hourly rates were referred to by Mr YY in his report. This was a proper reflection of the attributes of the lawyers who worked on the file and no further adjustment was necessary. The reasonable costs of running a practice [46] While this matter will be of relevance to the setting of any fee, it does not require special consideration in this case. Any fee agreement ente...

7. ENV-2016-AKL-000TBA Radiata Properties Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 8.2 MB]

   ...in (a) above be accepted and adopted, subject to any modifications considered by the Court to be necessary and appropriate to achieve a sustainable management outcome in terms of Part 2 RMA. (c) Costs. 11. An electronic copy ofthis notice is filed on the designated electronic address at the Auckland Registry of the Environment Court and is served today by email on the Auckland Council at unitaryplan@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz. Waivers and directions have been made by the Environment...

8. LCRO 174/2017 DN v CI [pdf, 328 KB]

   ...to terminate the Agreement; and (b) having received advice from Ms CI about retrieving the deposit, it was up to Mr DN to decide whether to follow that advice or take the matter up with the Broker himself. Application for review [15] Mr DN filed an application for review on 13 September 2017. He repeats that he wants the deposit of $20,000 returned to him and restates his concerns with Ms CI’s legal services. [16] To the extent that he raises new matters, he claims that Ms...

9. Tom de Pelsemmaeker - Recommended changes to PC7 (tracked) (4 March 2021) [pdf, 338 KB]

   ...for the proposal. The coding used is that contained in the Summary of Decisions table prepared for the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) and published on the EPA website. Some of these footnote references have been corrected since the filing of Evidence in Chief. Where “consequential amendment” is noted, the amendment is a necessary consequence of a submission-based recommended amendment so that the overall integrity of the plan change is maintained and/or to ensure...

10. Tom de Pelsemaeker - Recommended changes to PC7 (clean) (4 March 2021) [pdf, 308 KB]

    ...for the proposal. The coding used is that contained in the Summary of Decisions table prepared for the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) and published on the EPA website. Some of these footnote references have been corrected since the filing of Evidence in Chief. Where “consequential amendment” is noted, the amendment is a necessary consequence of a submission-based recommended amendment so that the overall integrity of the plan change is maintained and/or to ensure...