Search Results

1. [2025] NZREADT 34 - CL v REAA (12 August 2025) [pdf, 225 KB]

   ...dismissing his complaint was plainly wrong. The application for review is dismissed and the Registrar’s decision is confirmed. [37] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116, setting out the right of appeal to the High Court. 7 Purchaser’s submissions (26 June 2025) at [7.2]. 8 NRM Investments Ltd v Semone Trustees Ltd [2022] NZHC 735 at [41]–[42]; and XS v Registrar of Real Estate Agents Authority [2025] NZREADT 3 at [61]. 9...

2. Davies v Davies - Pipiwai A2 being Part Lot 1 DP 12852 (2025) 297 Taitokerau MB 1 (297 TTK 1) [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...consists of two elements: the intention to possess the land and the exercise of control over it to the exclusion of other persons. 1 Taueki v Horowhenua Sailing Club – Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Block (2014) Māori Appellate Court MB 60 (2014 APPEAL 60). 297 Taitokerau MB 7 [30] Once the elements for the trespass are made out, the Court then considers what remedy is appropriate. The prima facie rule is that a landowner is entitled to an injunction to restrain a trespass....

3. File other applications

   ...to seek legal advice before and during such a proceeding.  If you bring a judicial review proceeding you are called the applicant, and the person or body whose actions are being reviewed is called the respondent If you have the right to appeal or challenge a decision, you need to have already done this before you filed an application for judicial review. Time limit No time limit is prescribed for this application by the Employment Court Regulations but it may be prescribed by som...

   Located in:

   1. Employment Court >
   2. Apply to the Employment Court >
   3. File a challenge

4. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee v Parlane [2010] NZLCDT 26 [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...the profession in terms of its reputation and integrity. [25] Mr Parlane has a previous disciplinary record. Mr Parlane attempted to explain it away on the basis that the earlier disciplinary decisions were wrong, or that he only withdrew his appeals relating to findings against him in respect of 1 Section 3 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 6 those charges because he did not want to prolong matters. The matters occurred some...

5. Legal Complaints Review Officer v Denee [2011] NZLCDT 6 [pdf, 74 KB]

   ...occurred prior to the commencement of the Act. This was $2,000 and in addition it censured the practitioner and ordered the payment of costs of $3,230. The Standards Committee declined to publish the name of the practitioner. The complainant appealed the Standards Committee decision to the Legal Complaints Review Officer who, on 21 July 2010 gave a decision pursuant to sections 211(b) and 152(2) of the Act that the matter be referred to the Tribunal. Pursuant to section 212 char...

6. National Standards Committee 2 v Tennet [2025] NZLCDT 28 (16 June 2025) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...the public in the future. [13] We also refer to the previous finding of misconduct against Mr Tennet, by a previous Tribunal in 2023. We note that that misconduct, for which Mr Tennet was suspended for twelve months (reduced to nine months on appeal), involved a direct breach of trust to a client. While we accept that the current matters are more appropriately classified as “sins of omission”, the overall consequences are much more serious than in the previous misconduct. [1...

7. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Burcher [2018] NZLCDT 42 [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...decisions to prosecute. [31] We accept that the unsatisfactory conduct found was at the higher level of culpability. [32] Section 249 provides the Tribunal with a broad discretion in awarding costs, as has been recently affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Lagolago v Wellington Standards Committee 2.3 [33] Further, the legislation provides that, even in a situation of full acquittal, there is a provision granting the Tribunal ability to award costs.

8. Employment Court

   ...disputes.  Most cases are first dealt with in the Employment Relations Authority.  For information on the Employment Relations Authority, and how to bring a claim in the Authority see here. The Employment Court mainly deals with challenges (appeals) to determinations of the Employment Relations Authority.  It also deals with other claims, including disputes involving strikes and lockouts and applications for judicial review. If you want to know more about your employment rights o...

   Located in:

   1. Employment Court

9. [2015] NZEmpC 7 Alatipi v CE of the Department of Corrections [pdf, 280 KB]

   WILLIE ALATIPI v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS NZEmpC WELLINGTON [2015] NZEmpC 7 [5 February 2015] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON [2015] NZEmpC 7 WRC 12/13 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN WILLIE ALATIPI Plaintiff AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Defendant Hearing: 1-5 and 23 September 2014 (heard at Wellington) Appe

10. Tucker & Ors as Trustees of the Ngahere Trust v Tucker [pdf, 256 KB]

    CLAIM NO: 00540 UNDER The Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002 IN THE MATTER OF an adjudication BETWEEN GRAEME TUCKER and GLENYS TUCKER and STEPHEN SUDBURY as trustees of the Ngahere Trust Claimants AND ALLAN TUCKER First respondent (Intituling continued next page) Hearing: 13, 14 & 15 December 2004 Appearances: John Ross, counsel for the Claimants David Grindle, counsel for the First Respondent Roger Bowden, counsel for th