Search Results

1. Gemmell v Gemmell - Mohaka A4 Trust (2014) 32 Takitimu MB 174 (32 TKT 174) [pdf, 245 KB]

   ...made on the basis of events and inactions and actions from 3 May 2005. [19] Further, counsel for the respondent asks that costs be awarded against Sam Gemmell in favour of Arthur Gemmell on the basis that it has been necessary to provide the affidavit and submissions in opposition to the costs action. 32 Tākitimu MB 179 The Law [20] Section 79(1) of Te Ture Whenua Act 1993 provides: 79 Orders as to costs (1) In any proceedings, the court may make such order as it thin...

2. Taukiri – Parish of Karamu Lot 197A (2013) 52 Waikato Maniapoto MB 294 (52 WMN 294) [pdf, 134 KB]

   ...present application came about because Kevin Taukiri contacted NZRPT to discuss issues relating to the ownership of the block. Representatives of NZRPT were invited to attend a hui with Mr Taukiri and others on 14 April 2012 but, according to the affidavit filed by James Wright for NZRPT, it was decided that NZRPT would not send a representative to the hui as it was assumed that the issues under discussion related only to 20% share of the block owned by the Māori owners. [21] Trev...

3. Auckland Standards Committee v Murray [2014] NZLCDT 88 [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...to Re C,13 Leary14 and Re Veron15 where it was said: “From the earliest times and as far back and the recollection of the individual Judges of this Court goes, disciplinary proceedings in this jurisdiction … have always been concluded upon affidavit evidence and not otherwise. They are not conducted as if the Law Society … was a prosecutor in a criminal cause or as if we were engaged upon a trial of civil issues at nisi prius. The jurisdiction is a special one and it is not ope...

4. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee v Parlane [2011] NZLCDT 3 [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...are set out in a Schedule filed with the Tribunal on 6 October 2010. We consider those expenses reasonable. [28] Following the decision to lay charges, the Standards Committee retained counsel to finalise the charges, brief evidence and finalise affidavits, prepare and lay charges and supporting material, and to represent the committee before the Tribunal. There was also a formal review, relating to the investigation and preliminary findings, which was argued before the Legal Complaints...

5. Auckland Standards Committee v Johnston [2013] NZLCDT 30 [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...investigation into the complaint, the Standards Committee required the Practitioner to furnish documentation in relation to the investigator. The Practitioner knowingly failed to do so. 42 The Standards Committee further relies upon grounds appearing in the affidavits of Stephanie McGregor and Stephen Howard Barter.

6. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee v Hemi [2013] NZLCDT 23 [pdf, 121 KB]

   ...8 Daniels v Complaints Committee No. 2 of the Wellington District Law Society [2011] 3 NZLR 850. 10 place. He surrendered his practising certificate pending the outcome of these proceedings which he records in his affidavit as signifying “... a mark of my contrition and as the only appropriate response to my behaviour.” He immediately wrote to the Legal Services Agency asking for his legal aid assignments to be reassigned to alternate counsel to en

7. [2014] NZEmpC 15 Mattingly v Strata Title Management Ltd [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...at stake. [14] It seems to me that the only practical way of deciding a challenge to a costs determination is for the Court to be primarily informed through the submissions of the parties, with the possibility that this may be supported by affidavit evidence about contentious issues. ... Inevitably, a Judge of the Court deciding a challenge can never be as well informed about events as the member of the Authority who conducted the investigation but I can see no realistic means...

8. Ron Lunken Family Trust v Haywood Construction Limited [2011] NZWHT Auckland 66 [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...de Geest accepts that he performed are comparable to those of Mr Tay who was found not to be personally liable for work carried out by his company. Although Mr 14 At [23] of the Affidavit. Tay visited site only occasionally and had no day-to-day involvement with the construction or in the preparation of the plans, there are several similarities between their roles: they were both managing directors and majority...

9. TX v NE LCRO 03 / 2012 (18 February 2013) [pdf, 121 KB]

   ...reasonable step in seeking the guidance of the Court as to the appropriate course to take. In my view this was an entirely appropriate step to take, and no disciplinary issues arise. [37] The Practitioner had provided to the Committee a copy of the affidavit of ND and of her own Memorandum which were before the Court. The Applicant suggested (in her complaint and on review) that the Practitioner misled the Court or in some other way did not adhere to her duty to the Court. I can...

10. Dixon v Dixon [pdf, 75 KB]

    ...employed by Key Homes, one of the parties to the claim. 11. The claimant opposed the removal of Mr Cook on the grounds that an historical search shows that he was a registered proprietor of the property, a matter not 5 disclosed by Mr Cook in his affidavit. It was alleged that he has had more involvement in the property than he discloses. 12. It was explained that Mr Cook was a temporary trustee of the trust for a matter of weeks following a family dispute among the then trustee...