Search Results

1. LCRO 202/2017 LO v RT (4 February 2019) [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...complaints brought by the Bar ... [41] He did go on to say that:11 But it has also been said that res judicata or double jeopardy principles may not apply to disciplinary bodies because their “disciplinary requirements serve purposes essential to the protection of the public, which are deemed remedial, rather than punitive”: Spencer v Maryland State Board of Pharmacy, 846 A 2d 341, 352 (Maryland Court of Appeals, 2003); cf Re Fisher, 202 P 3d 1186, 1199 (Sup Ct, Colorado, 2009)....

2. Lawyer-for-Subject-Person.-Selection-Appointment-and-Other-Matters.pdf [pdf, 238 KB]

   ...this practice note: (a) PPPR Act means the Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act 1998. (b) MHCAT Act means the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1992. (c) IDCCR Act means the Intellectual Disability (Compulsory Care and Rehabilitation) Act 2003. (d) SACAT Act means the Substance Addiction (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 2017. (e) The term “subject person” means a person in respect of whom an application is made under the PPPR Act....

3. [2023] NZIACDT 28 – YI v MM (8 November 2023) [pdf, 161 KB]

   ...[97], [101]–[102] and [112]. 8 ASSESSMENT [34] The Registrar relies on the following provisions of the Code: General 1. A licensed immigration adviser must be honest, professional, diligent and respectful and conduct themselves with due care and in a timely manner. Client Care 2. A licensed immigration adviser must: … e. obtain and carry out the informed lawful instructions of the client, and … Code and complaint documents 17. Before entering into a written...

4. Taylor v Auckland Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 42 [pdf, 134 KB]

   ...applied to join the second respondents, Gayle and Stewart Cox to this claim. The Council’s application alleged that Page | 4 the second respondents were developers in their personal capacity and, as such, owed a non-delegable duty of care to Ms Taylor. [6] I ordered that the joinder application be put on notice to the second respondents so that they may indicate their position on the application. The second respondents took no steps in relation to the joinder applic...

5. Chief Registrar - Matauri X Incorporation [2005] Chief Judge's MB 276 (2005 CJ 276) [pdf, 962 KB]

   ...only of the Judge's letter to me personally dated 7 February, in which he indicated that he had instructed counsel to produce documents vvhich may be of relevance to my review of this decision (see para 26 supra). [42] I have thought very carefully about the allegation of pre-determination. It is a serious allegation. I do ,not on reflection, think that it is justified. The correspondence with the learned Judge to which I have referred was my advice as Head of Bench to a collea...

6. [2016] NZEmpC 137 Bennett and Others v Michaels and Others [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...of the corporate entities. Looking back, Ms Bennett considers the defendant companies were mere shells without assets and that her employment with them was a fraudulent sham on Mr Michaels’ part. She considers he relied upon the companies as protecting him from personal liability when in fact he was her true employer. [14] Mr van Geems and Mr Zainol described similar circumstances of apparent fraudulent behaviour by Mr Michaels in their employment. Mr van Geems is now resid...

7. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Anderson [2022] NZLCDT 25 (22 July 2022) [pdf, 238 KB]

   ...of $2.2M (with a priority of $4.2M) had been obtained in September 2008 by Ms V without authority. [31] Ms V immediately acknowledged what she had done to Ms Anderson and provided her with a copy of the loan documentation. [32] In order to protect herself, Ms Anderson prepared a Deed of Trust for Assets in which Ms V acknowledged what she had done, acknowledged that she had misrepresented her position as a bare trustee to the ASB Bank, and that she was solely responsible for t...

8. McCleery – Waihaha 3D2 Inc (1997) 1 Waiariki Appellate MB 67 (1 AP 67) [pdf, 1.4 MB]

   ...presupposes that the Judge, in exercising his function, will have to act in an investigatory capacity and in all probability subsequently in a judicial one. This is a roll that Maori Land Court Judges are expected to play and those Judges have to be careful to ensure that when these two functions are involved they give every opportunity to persons affected so that natural justice is not denied. In the present case the learned Judge gave every opportunity to the Committee of Management to an...

9. Harland v ACC [2012] NZACA 2 [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...March 2007. [2] The appeal was against a review decision dated 20 February 2003 (the review decision), which in turn was against the Corporation’s decision made on 10 March 2003 (the decision), to decline an application for backdated attendant care under s 80(3) of the Accident Compensation Act 1982 (the application). 2 [3] The impetus for the application to reinstate the appeal was my decision in Nee Harland v ACC [2012] NZACA in respect of the appeal filed unde...

10. [2020] NZEmpC 142 Kwik Kiwi Cars Ltd T/A Mark Cromie Motor Group v Crossley [pdf, 308 KB]

    ...reasons.”6 [52] Chief Judge Inglis went on to make the important point that sincerity and/or improper motive must also be assessed in the context of the principles underlying the Convention;7 the statutory provision is intended to ensure that the normal protections available to an employee upon termination of employment should not be circumvented. [53] In Morgan, the presence of redundancy provisions undermined the employer’s claim that a fixed-term provision was justified....