Search Results

1. [2020] NZIACDT 33 - RV v Aiolupotea (27 July 2020) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...immigration advice, and to enhance the reputation of New Zealand as a migration destination, by providing for the regulation of persons who give immigration advice. [26] The focus of professional disciplinary proceedings is not punishment, but the protection of the public:3 …It is well established that professional disciplinary proceedings are civil and not criminal in nature. That is because the purpose of statutory disciplinary proceedings for various occupations is not to punish...

2. Complaints Assessment Comittee 404 v Hawkins [2017] NZREADT 16 [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...[b] Mr Hawkins did not explain, or explain adequately, to Ms Fletcher his role in the transactions after he “stepped in” as vendor. [c] Mr Hawkins obtained a financial benefit from the sale of lots to Ms Fletcher and Ms Mardon, in that he protected his own purchase, and his own investment in the subdivision. [d] Mr Hawkins did not advise Ms Fletcher, either orally or in writing, that by selling lots 3 and 4 to her he would obtain a financial benefit. [e] Mr Hawkins did not ad...

3. Non-discrimination standards for government guidelines [pdf, 392 KB]

   ...available through which to lodge complaints about allegedly discriminatory public sector activities. Such matters had to be (and still can be) pursued through the courts. Prior to 31 December 2001, section 151 (now repealed) of the Human Rights Act protected the public sector from the full impact of the Human Rights Act non- discrimination standard. Section 151(1) stated that the Human Rights Act did not override other enactments, and those enactments stood even if there was discrimination....

4. Discussion paper - Re-evaluation of Human Rights protections [pdf, 534 KB]

   Ministry of Justice Te Manatu Ture Discussion Paper Re-evaluation of the Human Rights Protections in New Zealand RE-EVALUATION OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTIONS IN NEW ZEALAND REPORT FOR THE ASSOCIATE MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND ATTORNEY-GENERAL HON. MARGARET WILSON 3 DISCLAIMER The Ministerial Re-evaluation of Human Rights Protections in New Zealand was written by an independent evaluation team for the Minister of Justice. The views expressed in it are those of the independent evalua...

5. Tesar v REAA CAC 20004 & Ors [2014] NZREADT 18 [pdf, 54 KB]

   ...generally criticises the Committee’s reasoning for finding unsatisfactory conduct on her part. [20] The appellant presented her views confidently and assertively. She emphasised that she had inserted the original clause 18 in the contract to protect the complainant purchasers but (as we have explained above) the vendors would not accept that version and replaced it. [21] Under cross-examination, the appellant licensee insisted that she had not relied on anything which the vendors...

6. Applicant C v Registrar of Real Estate Agents Authority 2017] NZREADT 10 [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...that she had been convicted of a crime involving dishonesty. She also disclosed that the company was being liquidated. [8] The applicant was then asked to provide details as to her offending and the charges she faced, the likely penalties, and protections put in place by her employer to ensure that she was supervised and supported. The applicant responded to that request. [9] On [ ], the Registrar advised the applicant that she intended to decline her application to renew he...

7. LCRO 217/2016 and 218/2016 RE and YI v WG (14 November 2018) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...considered are a censure and/or a fine.17 Other orders provided for in s 156(1) of the Act are inapplicable. [60] In addressing the nature of a fine the authors of the text Ethics, Professional Responsibility and the Lawyer say: 18 A fine has no protective or rehabilitative function. It is largely punitive, and perhaps also serves the purpose of setting certain conduct aside as falling short of acceptable standards to a significant degree. [61] Mr WG’s acceptance of the adverse...

8. LCRO 83/2024 AGM v CPF (24 March 2025) [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...that the conduct breaches, when considered in their totality and by reference to the broad circumstances of the retainer, merit imposition of a fine in the sum of $5,000. [91] I consider a fine of $2,000 adequately meets the regulatory and consumer protection objectives. Costs [92] Ms AGM has had partial success with her review but in large part the finding of the Standards Committee has been confirmed. It is appropriate that Ms AGM be ordered to contribute to the costs of this revi...

9. LCRO 53/2020 YJ v GK (22 April 2021) [pdf, 280 KB]

   ...diverged. It did not “lie in Mr GK’s mouth” to say he could not discharge his duty to ABCD and Mr YJ, because he had discharged, or was in the course of discharging, his duties to Mr DQ. [127] Mr GK is in breach of rule 6, in that he was not ‘protecting and promoting the interests’ of ABCD and Mr YJ. Decision [128] The Standards Committee determined that Mr GK’s conduct “… [fell] short of the standard of competence and diligence that a member of the public is entit...

10. Proactive-release-Legal-Services-Amendment-Bill_FINAL.pdf [pdf, 1.8 MB]

    ...funding for section 27 Released in Part. reports Some information has been withheld in Cabinet paper accordance with sections 9(2)(h) of OIA to Ministry of Justice maintain legal professional privilege, 9(2)(f)(iv) to Meeting date: 13 December 2023 protect confidentiality of advice tendered by Ministers and officials, and s 6(2)(a) to protect international relation. 2. Removing taxpayer funding for section 27 Released in full. reports Cabinet 100-Day Plan Committee Minute [100-23...