Search Results

1. LCRO 171/2023 PF v DS (1 February 2024) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...available if the LCRO considers that the review can be adequately determined in the absence of the parties. The parties were invited to comment on this proposed course of action and neither of them objected to it. 7 [32] I record that having carefully read the complaint, the response to the complaint, the Committee’s decision and the submissions filed in support of and in opposition to the application for review, there are no additional issues or questions in my mind that necessit...

2. 2025 NZPSPLA 057.pdf [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...relevant is the rehabilitation of the practitioner and as such the public interest in having a rehabilitated practitioner providing capable services. [32] Mr McKnight submits that there is no public interest in ending Mr Shepherd’s exemplary career in the security industry given its longevity, his voluntary services including at the Trust, and his rehabilitation. Also of relevance is that the events occurred in November 2019, August/September 2020 and January 2021 and therefore ar...

3. Hawkes Bay Standards Committee v Heaphy [2014] NZLCDT 61 [pdf, 343 KB]

   ...lawyer and friend quite heavily. [5] Soon after the raid, Mr Heaphy discovered the extent and depth of the investigation by Immigration New Zealand, and the likelihood that it would lead to his client facing serious charges. He sought to urgently protect his client from an attack on his assets, which he saw arising from two sources, which will be referred to later. [6] The extent of Mr Porter’s own “panic” and motivation to shelter assets was the subject of considerable dispu...

4. Roos v Wang [2010] NZWHT Auckland 10 [pdf, 288 KB]

   IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI 2009-100-000053 [2010] NZWHT AUCKLAND 10 BETWEEN CHARLES and HELEN MARIE ROOS Claimants AND THOMAS GANG WANG First Respondent AND FU HAO CONSTRUCTION LIMITED Second Respondent AND ADRIAN ROSS KIFF Third Respondent AND BAYS HOUSE INSPECTION SERVICES LIMITED Fourth Respondent Hearing: 2 February 2010 Final Submissions received: 26 February 2010 Appearances: Ms L Gerrard, Counsel for the Claimants. Mr

5. Harvey v CAC 10063 & Kelsall [2012] NZREADT 21 [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...journalist having telephoned the appellant, as the listing real estate agent, to ascertain whether there had been developments towards the sale of the property since the auction. [8] It is clear to us that the appellant, who gave evidence and was carefully cross- examined before us, has been proud of his record up till now of no complaints being made against him as a real estate agent for over 12 years. He is a highly successful agent selling about 45 to 50 houses per annum.

6. CAC10063 v Picknell [2013] NZREADT 41 [pdf, 57 KB]

   ...Picknell’s error is out of step with her general good character. [8] Ms Picknell’s counsel identified the four issues which are important in a sentence (see Real Estate Agents Authority v Lum-on [2012] NZREADT 47). These issues are: [a] Protection of the public; [b] Maintenance of standards; [c] Punishment; and [d] Rehabilitation of the agent. [9] Mr Collecutt submits on behalf of Ms Picknell that there is no need for protection of the public as there is no risk of a rep...

7. LCRO 113/2021 VN v [Area] Standards Committee [X] (27 June 2022) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...Act, which allows a Legal Complaints Review Officer (LCRO) to conduct the review on the basis of all information available if the LCRO considers that the review can be adequately determined in the absence of the parties. [31] I record that having carefully read the complaint, the response to the complaint, the Committee’s decision and the submissions filed in support of and in opposition to the application for review, there are no additional issues or questions in my mind that necess...

8. BORA Immigration Amendment Bill (No.2) [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...provides that: Every person has the right to the observance of the principles of natural justice by any tribunal or other public authority which has the power to make a determination in respect of that person's rights, obligations, or interests protected or recognised by law. 6. The Court of Appeal has stated that observance of the principles of natural justice is a flexible concept and is very much fact specific.[1] In Kindler v. Canada (Minister of Justice) [2] (in which the appel...

9. Shankar v Ahuja [2015] NZIACDT 36 (31 March 2015) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...did so without giving proper advice and taking informed instructions on the matter, and Immigration New Zealand rejected the request. [2.9] The complainant could not work and suffered hardship while she successfully appealed to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal. [3] Mr Ahuja says the complainant’s account is untrue. He says he did receive instructions, but before he could lodge the application, the complainant removed papers from his office and took over the instructions. She l...

10. LCRO 45/2020 MN v RK (22 December 2020) [pdf, 249 KB]

    ...proposal. [10] Mr MN rendered fees in the sum of $9,162.63 (GST inclusive). [11] On 25 January 2019, Ms RK filed a complaint against Mr MN with the Lawyers Complaints Service. [12] On 7 February 2019, Mr MN lodged a caveat against the property to protect his fees. [13] Mr MN provided a first response to the complaint on 19 February 2019. To the extent that his comprehensive response addressed issues of complaint that are not relevant to this review, there is no purpose served i...