Search Results

1. National Standards Committee 2 v Mr Y [2022] NZLCDT 8 (24 February 2022) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...produced at any hearing: 13 (c) an order prohibiting the publication of the name or any particulars of the affairs of the person charged or any other person. (2) Unless it is reversed or modified in respect of its currency by the High Court on appeal under section 253, an order made under subsection (1) continues in force until such time as may be specified in the order, or, if no time is specified, until the Disciplinary Tribunal, in its discretion, revokes it on the application...

2. Nelson Standards Committee v Downing and Reith [2022] NZLCDT 21 (27 June 2022) [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...on the appropriate sum. The Standards Committee seeks $10,000, the practitioners agree to a sum of $3,000. Discussion [25] Determining the appropriate award of compensation is an art rather than scientific exercise, as stated by the Court of Appeal in Commissioner of Police v Hawkins9: …claims for what amounts to damage to dignitary interests are complex and very important. Remedies scholars (and increasingly courts) rightly see this as a particularly important and developing...

3. CAC 20006 v Azimi [2014] NZREADT 69 [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...submits that, if we accept that the factual allegations are proved, misconduct findings under s.73(a) must follow. Section 73(a) of the Act is set out above. [54] In Pillai v Messiter (No 2) (1989) 16 NSWLR 197 (NSWCA) the New South Wales Court of Appeal said of misconduct: "Professional misconduct does not arise where there is mere professional incompetence nor deficiencies in the practice of the profession by a practitioner. More is required. Such misconduct includes a delibe...

4. O'Connell & Anor v Auckland Council & Ors [2013] NZWHT Auckland 7 [pdf, 294 KB]

   ...September 2010. 6 Askin v Knox [1989] 1 NZLR 248 (CA). Page | 20 Council officer’s conduct will be judged against the knowledge and practice at the time at which the negligent act or omission was said to take place. [79] The Court of Appeal in Byron Avenue7 accepted that the Council owed a duty of care in its inspections even before the final inspection issuing a Code Compliance Certificate. It stated: [59] I consider that the Hamlin principle imposes on councils i...

5. Zhong v Auckland Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 32 [pdf, 264 KB]

   Page | 1 IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2009-100-000105 [2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 32 BETWEEN HONG ZHONG AND RUN ZHONG Claimants AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL First Respondent AND ROSE MARY MCLAUGHLAN Second Respondent AND YA WEI LI Third Respondent AND STANLEY CHEN Fourth Respondent AND ORIENT BUILDERS LIMITED Fifth Respondent AND LU ZHENG Sixth Respondent AND HBRC LIMITED Seventh Respondent Hearing: 29, 30 and 31 March 2011 Closing

6. Singh v Singh and Scorpion Liquor (2006) Ltd [2016] NZHRRT 38 [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...Denyer v Scorpion Liquor (2006) Limited [2012] NZERA Auckland 448 5392831, 11 December 2012. 12 employees to sign the entries about them or confirm their hours because the diary was for his use only. [52] He accepted that he did not appeal either decision. Like his mother, he said the reason the wage arrears were not paid for 20 months was that his funds were frozen by the restraining orders. [53] Shane Singh said he assumed that all the mail delivered to Scorpion...

7. [2017] NZEnvC 180 Ngai te hapu Incorporated v Bay of Plenty Regional Council [pdf, 1.4 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA Decision No. [2017] NZEnvC \ 30 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND appeals under s 120 of the Act BETWEEN NGAI TE HAPQ INCORPORATED (ENV-20 16-AKL -000042) NGA POTIKI A TAMAPAHORE TRUST (ENV-2016-AKL-000045) Appellants AND BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent AND ASTROLABE COMMUNITY TRUST Applicant Court: Environment Judge JA Smith Date of Decision: 31 October 2017 Date of Issue: 31 Oc...

8. Canterbury / Westland Standards Committee 3 v Johnson [2018] NZLCDT 5 [pdf, 464 KB]

   ...by proffering unsought advice on the wisdom of the transaction. To hold otherwise could impose intolerable burdens on solicitors.” [97] Mr Waalkens submits that two further cases have added a gloss to this. In the Haira38 case. The Court of Appeal commented on the Clark Boyce dictum as follows: “We do not read the judgment as holding that a solicitor will never be under a duty, whether before or after accepting instructions, to offer advice on the wisdom of the transaction. Whe...

9. Chapman v Western Bay of Plenty District Council [pdf, 364 KB]

   ...Fardell (as set out at [30]) has affirmed personal assumption of responsibility as a requirement of directors' personal liability in respect of a variety of duties of care. Notably, in Mahon v Crockett (1999) 8 NZCLC 262,043, the Court of Appeal acknowledged at [9]-[12] that the requirement of assumption of responsibility, as articulated in Trevor Ivory, generally applies to tortious causes of action against directors. [43] Assumption of responsibility in negligent constru...

10. [2019] NZEnvC 114 Pan Pac Forest Products Ltd [pdf, 2.3 MB]

    ...process the application to occupy more of the seabed consents as a variation of existing consent CL 1200580 and all consents and variations were granted by the Council on 16 September 2015. The Maungaharuru-Tangitu Trust ("the Trust") appealed the decision, seeking that the Environment Court decline the consents. (f) The appeal was the subject of an Environment Court hearing in August 2016, which considered the effects of the relocated discharge on the marine environment...