Search Results

1. National Standards Committee 2 v Tingey [2023] NZLCDT 43 (10 October 2023) [pdf, 169 KB]

   ...ought to impact on penalty. 9. The importance of maintaining public confidence in the provision of legal services, which incorporates scrutiny of the disciplinary process. The purposes of disciplinary penalties was discussed by the Court of Appeal in Morahan4: [40] In deciding whether s 351 of the 2006 Act prohibited the Tribunal from considering in its penalty decision Mr Morahan’s conduct prior to 1 August 2002, we consider it helpful to first examine the purpose that underp...

2. [2024] NZIACDT 03 – MT v Murthy (11 January 2024) [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...in Australia or his removal from Australia. He was subsequently issued with a work visa, having again failed to declare his criminal history. When Immigration New Zealand (Immigration NZ) found out, he was issued with a deportation order. An appeal to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal failed.1 He left New Zealand in 2015. [6] On 1 June 2021, the complainant and the client, together with Ms Murthy, signed the immigration company’s service contract. Ms Murthy agreed to se...

3. LCRO 27/2024 VF v SR and BR (23 May 2025) [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...papers. Nature and scope of review [46] The High Court has described a review by this Office in the following way:16 16 Deliu v Connell [2016] NZHC 361, [2016] NZAR 475 at [2]. 8 A review by the LCRO is neither a judicial review nor an appeal. Those seeking a review of a Committee determination are entitled to a review based on the LCRO’s own opinion rather than on deference to the view of the Committee. A review by the LCRO is informal, inquisitorial and robust. It invo...

4. OIA-120507.pdf [pdf, 1 MB]

   ...separate occasions within a 12-month period.1 When does lawful protest action become unlawful behaviour? 9. The question of whether a particular protest is lawful will depend on the circumstances. 10. In Brooker v Police, the Supreme Court considered an appeal by a person who had been convicted of disorderly behaviour under the Summary Offences Act 1981 after publicly protesting in the street outside a police constable’s house. The majority found that:2 10.1. circumstances relevant to wh...

5. Morrison - Moteo Hapua Te Pirau 1C 4B (2024) 113 Tākitimu MB 193 (113 TKT 193) [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...help regulate the applicant’s personal affairs seems to be based on an expectation that he should be entitled to partition his shares out of the block 12 MacDonald v MacDonald - Wairau Block XII 6C2C [2016] Māori Appellate Court MB 370 (2016 APPEAL 370). 113 Tākitimu MB 200 simply because it suits him. The submission that he thought he purchased the entire block in 1978 seems to be based on an assumption that it would be reasonable now to partition his interests. N...

6. LCRO 196/2022 LQ and BQ v HN (2 December 2024) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...complain about costs. 11 Letter HN to LCRO (22 December 2022) at [7.2]. 8 Nature and scope of review [50] The High Court has described a review by this Office in the following way:12 A review by the LCRO is neither a judicial review nor an appeal. Those seeking a review of a Committee determination are entitled to a review based on the LCRO’s own opinion rather than on deference to the view of the Committee. A review by the LCRO is informal, inquisitorial and robust. It...

7. Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Kwon [2024] NZLCDT 44 (11 December 2024) [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...C and his son. Mr C’s wife, Ms D, had been represented by Mr Kwon in unsuccessful immigration applications. [10] The complaint related to the nature and quality of the practitioner’s attendances. The essence of the concern was that an appeal to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal (IPT) was out of time because of prior steps taken by the practitioner. [11] The complaint also sought an examination of the fee arrangement because the complainant said that the practitioner...

8. [2023] NZREADT 33 - CAC 2102 v LL (4 December 2023) [pdf, 240 KB]

   ...towards the Committee’s costs. Payment is to be made to the Authority within 40 working days of the date of this decision. [64] 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. NON-PUBLICATION [65] Having regard to the interests of the public in knowing of wrongdoing by licensees and the jurisprudence of the Tribunal, as well as the privacy of the people involved, it is appropriate to or...

9. Fee system for alcohol licensing

   ...exclusive of GST. Table 4: Fees payable for other applications Application type Total amount payable Amount of total fee transferred/paid to ARLA Manager's certificate application $275 $25 Temporary authority $258 n/a Temporary licence $258 n/a Appeal to ARLA $450 n/a (paid directly to ARLA) Extract of register (ARLA or DLC) $50 $50 of an extract is sought from the ARLA register Permanent Club Charter (annual fee due on 30 June of each year and paid to ARLA) $550 n/a Back to top...

   Located in:

   1. Justice sector & policy >
   2. Key initiatives >
   3. Key initiatives archive >
   4. Sale & supply of alcohol >
   5. Licensing

10. About the Tribunal

    ...Community. Bronwen Klippel Bronwen Klippel practised as a lawyer in Auckland for more than 30 years, working mainly in the areas of family law, health professional disciplinary work and mediation and was appointed as a part-time member of the Refugee Status Appeals Authority in 2003. Ms Klippel has undertaken community work and voluntary positions including sitting on two school trust boards, mentoring secondary school students, advising Womens' Refuges and Citizen Advice Bureaus, and having ex...

    Located in:

    1. Tribunals >
    2. Human rights