Search Results

1. McCreath v Attorney-General (Interim Non-Publication Order) [2014] NZHRRT 59 [pdf, 46 KB]

   ...granted the court or tribunal must identify and weigh the interests of both the public and the individual seeking publication. [11] In the present case the affidavits by Nurse A and Nurse B establish: [11.1] They provided immediate and appropriate care to Mr McCreath and appear to have been named as defendants simply because their initials appear in the Controlled Drugs signing sheet as having administered controlled medication to Mr McCreath on 21 April 2012. Their names were provided...

2. Maori Land Court Recusal Guidelines [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...consideration will be needed in situations where a judge’s spouse, partner or a family member has an involvement or a financial interest in the outcome of a proceeding. Disclosure of conflict of interest Principles Adequate disclosure protects the integrity of the judicial process and is also a defence against later challenges to the decision. Disclosure does not constitute an acknowledgement that the circumstances give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias....

3. LCRO 124/2018 BK v [Area] Standards Committee (25 February 2020) [pdf, 140 KB]

   ...statements as to whether or not their client was the settlor of any funds. The attempt to correct this issue does not amount to a complete answer to all the issues the judge identified. [16] The lawyer also observed the lawyer’s evidence was carefully scrutinised by senior lawyers, including a prominent lawyer. That does not relieve the lawyer of the responsibility for the evidence provided, as they had the duty to the Court. Further, the scrutinising lawyers would have only had i...

4. LCRO 149/2023 HV v BQ (29 April 2024) [pdf, 136 KB]

   ...received such an 2 explanation, it is unlikely she would have made her fees complaint or expressed the understandings she expressed in it. [5] The applicant emphasises that his fees were “cheap”. The answer to that submission is that client care under the Rules is not assessed solely in terms of outcome and cost but also in terms of information, communication and understanding of the legal process. [6] The applicant’s breach of r 13.4 is less material. In particular, I h...

5. [2022] NZEnvC 140 Cornelius v Western Bay of Plenty District Council [pdf, 419 KB]

   ...or a determination of the Environment Court states otherwise. [10] The primary purpose of s 116 of the Act is to specify when a resource consent commences. Relevantly in this case, s 116(1) specifies the time of commencement on a basis which protects any right of appeal by suspending commencement until any appeal right has expired or any appeal has been determined. There is a reservation to the Court of a power to determine a commencement otherwise than as specified in the sectio...

6. Argyle v Macdee McLennan Construction Ltd & Ors [2012] NZWHT Auckland 30 [pdf, 361 KB]

   ...were: The manner of attachment of the pergola to the cladding which he said would leak in time. Bubbling in the cladding indicating the need for horizontal expansion joints. Flat parapet tops which would allow moisture ingress unless protected by a waterproofing membrane. The stainless steel handrail which also should be protected by waterproofing underneath the base of the posts. Page | 6 Roof apron flashings which ought to have kick-out flashings to pr...

7. Chittock v ACC [2014] NZACA 4 [pdf, 157 KB]

   ...Nor does refusing to produce documentation when directed to do so by the Authority generally assist in the presentation of one’s case. The Issues [4] The issues that I have to determine are: [a] Was the 1998 payment for backdated attendant care under s 80 of the 1982 Act for the period from 14 April 1984 to 11 September 1995 made under s 80(1) as ACC contends, or s 80(3) as Mr Wakefield contends? [b] Can the 1998 payment be reliably taken to indicate that ACC was satisfied t...

8. Complaints Assessment Committee 412 v Grewal, Preet & Co Real Estate Limited, Voordouw & Mason [2018] NZREADT 47 [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...of the Agency1 he signed trust account reconciliations that were incorrect; and [b] a charge under s 73(c) of the Act (charge 5), alleging a wilful or reckless breach of r 7.2 of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012 (“the Rules”), in that he failed to make a report to the Real Estate Agents Authority (“the Authority”) when he had reasonable grounds to suspect that Mr Grewal had been guilty of misconduct. In the alternative, Mr Vo...

9. K v N [2013] NZREADT 111 [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...should give s 136 a more liberal interpretation so that a licensee must notify any party where a potential conflict arises, rather than only in circumstances where a transaction is about to be entered into. [23] The Tribunal have considered this carefully. It is certainly true that the Tribunal should not give an unduly restrictive interpretation to the Act. However s 136 clearly sets out the steps required of an agent and it specifies that there must be some transaction which trigger...

10. LCRO 184/2021 PW v QM (21 March 2023) [pdf, 184 KB]

    ...Standards Committee determination [11] The Committee identified two issues to be addressed:4 a) Were the fees charged fair and reasonable for the services provided? (rule 9 and 9.1 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (RCCC)); b) Did Ms QM use legal processes only for proper purposes? (rule 2.3 of the RCCC). Fees [12] Before addressing the complaint about the quantum of Ms QM’s fees, the Committee posed the question as to whether M...