Search Results

1. Linton v Keswick LCRO 95 / 2009 (25 August 2009) [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...particularly stressful event. Having heard from Ms Linton I am satisfied that the conduct of Mr Keswick in, without notice, refusing to act further caused her anxiety and distress to such a degree that compensation is appropriate. The Court of Appeal has recognised that such distress damages are compensatory in nature: Paper Reclaim Ltd v Aotearoa International Ltd [2006] 3 NZLR 188 (CA) at para 171. [62] Such an order could be made pursuant to s 156(1)(d) of the Lawyers and Conv...

2. Head Heights Limited v Auckland Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 24 [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...Honour was not required to resolve the question of whether a building consent could be obtained for targeted repairs. [29] The same question was considered recently by the High Court in Chee v Stareast Investment Limited.5 Chee involved an appeal from a 4 Body Corporate 185960 v North Shore City Council (Kilham Mews). 5 Chee v Stareast Investment Limited [2012] NZHC 133. Page | 10 decision by the Tribunal t...

3. BORA Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill [pdf, 217 KB]

   ...the view that new section 103(1B) does not appear to be prima facie inconsistent with section 27(1) because we do not consider that the decision to suspend the payment is a "determination" for the purposes of section 27(1). The Court of Appeal in Chisholm v Auckland City Council11 held that a determination for the purposes of section 27(1) must be of an adjudicative character. The decision of the Commissioner to temporarily suspend the payment in this context is not adjudicat...

4. Chand and Kumari v Prakash [2012] NZIACDT 85 (3 December 2012) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...power to regulate its own procedure (section 49(1)). However, for a professional disciplinary body in contemporary New Zealand to operate without its decisions being available to the public would be a truly exceptional situation. [108] The Court of Appeal in R v Liddell [1995] 1 NZLR 538 at 546 per Cooke P said, in relation to the question of name suppression: [T]he starting point must always be the importance in a democracy of freedom of speech, open judicial proceedings, and the right...

5. EV v IG LCRO 111/2013 (8 September 2015) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...threshold required for further action. A history of driving with excess breath alcohol and/or some other surrounding circumstance would usually be necessary to warrant further disciplinary action. [66] In Bolton v The Law Society the English Court of Appeal made an observation similar to that made by the High Court of Australia in Ziems, and added that the balancing exercise was to be made “… by the Tribunal as an informed and expert body, on all the facts of the case”.26 [...

6. LG v Hakaoro [2013] NZIACDT 23 (03 April 2013) [pdf, 168 KB]

   ...decision. Publication [104] The Tribunal orders the name of the complainant and any information that may identify her will not be published or disclosed, except as necessary to allow the parties to obtain professional assistance and pursue rights of appeal. [105] Subject to the preceding limitation, this decision will be published with the names of the parties after five working days, unless any party applies for orders not to publish any aspect. DATED at WELLINGTON this 3 r...

7. NZCASS advanced statistical methods [pdf, 369 KB]

   ...been assessed as the more preferred model to be used to provide an understanding of predictors of  victimisation.   17  Gini coefficient This part of the advanced statistical methods section uses a ‘Gini coefficient’ to provide a measure of  the distribution of victimisation. It is appealing as a statistic since it summarises the distribution in a  single summary statistic, enabling comparisons over time and between group...

8. BORA Customs and Excise Bill [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...detained is the protection of human dignity, autonomy and liberty. 12 73. To trigger the concept of detention there must be a “substantial intrusion on personal liberty” 13, whether a physical deprivation or a statutory constraint. The Court of Appeal has held that: 14 “An arrest or detention is arbitrary if it is capricious, unreasoned, without reasonable cause: if it is made without reference to an adequate determining principle or without following proper procedures.”...

9. LCRO 168/2016 WT v MD (30 May 2018) [pdf, 269 KB]

   ...the MD Group could be considered to be somewhat unique and it is not surprising that the potential defence was identified by the Group’s own insurer who would be thoroughly familiar with the law surrounding insurance claims. [92] The Court of Appeal has stated that a lawyer is not liable:22 for mistake in a nice and difficult point of law but he must measure up to the degree of professional competence which would be exercised by the reasonably competent and careful solicitor in th...

10. [2014] NZLCDT 80 Wellington Standards Committee v CLS [pdf, 412 KB]

    ...considered to be of and incidental to legal work and therefore legal work which is covered by the term “regulated services”. [52] Counsel for the practitioner opposed the submissions of the Committee. He referred to the decision of the Court of Appeal in Hansen v Young.1 In that decision the Court referred to the different capacities that a solicitor has in the dual role of solicitor/trustee. It held that the responsibility for the administration of an estate was with the exe...