Search Results

1. I Ltd v V Ltd [2024] NZDT 97 (18 January 2024) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...out the tattoo and has used the photographs. 4. I Ltd claims $3,561.15, being: the cost of photoshopping ($953.35); legal fees ($747.50); a refund of the $900 paid to V Ltd; the cost of flying OB to and from [City 1] ($552.60); waxing and skin care ($58.00); the taxi from the airport ($37.60); nail care costs ($72.10); accommodation ($240). Issues 5. The issues for the Tribunal to determine are: (a) Whether V Ltd engaged in misleading conduct; (b) If so, whether I Ltd is...

2. TC v X Ltd & I Ltd [2024] NZDT 706 (4 September 2024) [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...plumbing claims its invoiced amount of $1334.00 from TC. 8. The issues to be determined are: • Were the blockages caused by construction waste? • If so, what remedy is available to TC? • Did I Ltd perform their service with reasonable care and skill when they opened up the ceiling to check for issues further down the system? • If not, what remedy is available to TC? Were the blockages caused by construction waste? 9. I find that there is insufficient evidence to...

3. KF v D Ltd & BU [2025] NZDT 140 (31 March 2025) [pdf, 190 KB]

   ...4. The issues to be resolved are whether D Ltd and its driver BU are at fault and therefore responsible for compensating KF for his losses. Are D Ltd and BU at fault? 5. Under the law of negligence all drivers owe other road users a duty of care. The duty of care requires drivers to drive to the standard of a reasonable and prudent driver. This standard can be determined by considering the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 (LT Rule). The relevant Rules are dealt with below. 6...

4. [2025] NZIACDT 54 - SC v Wharekura (15 October 2025) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...refund of the fee of $1,750 paid to Mr Wharekura, as well as interest on this amount for three years. [24] In his first affidavit (18 September 2025), the complainant says he is now a resident after a successful appeal to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal (IPT). According to the complainant, he instructed Mr Wharekura on three occasions to remove his partner from the residence application. As a direct result, he was unable to secure residence. He lost an excellent and sta...

5. JR v QL LCRO 108 / 2012 (7 September 2012) [pdf, 80 KB]

   ...Counsel stated that it was known to the Standards Committee that the Practitioner had surrendered his practising certificate and accepted that he was not suited to the practice of law. Finally Counsel submitted that a prosecution did not assist in protecting the public because the Practitioner was no longer practising. He questioned whether the significant costs associated with a prosecution could be justified in all of these circumstances. [13] Counsel submitted that the Practi...

6. BORA Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill [pdf, 318 KB]

   ...otherwise. 8. There are two limbs to the section 21 right. First, section 21 is applicable only in respect of those activities that constitute a "search or seizure". Second, where certain actions do constitute a search or seizure, section 21 protects only against those searches or seizures that are "unreasonable" in the circumstances. 9. New Part 5D, to be inserted by clause 11 of the Bill, contains powers of search and seizure that require scrutiny for compliance wi...

7. BORA Trade Marks (International Treaties And Enforcement) Amendment Bill [pdf, 309 KB]

   ...seizure. There are two limbs to the section 21 right. First, section 21 is applicable only in respect of those activities that constitute a "search or seizure". Second, where certain actions do constitute a search or seizure, section 21 protects only against those searches or seizures that are "unreasonable" in the circumstances. Powers of entry and examination – search and seizure without a warrant Clause 17 of the Bill inserts Subpart 2A into the Trade Ma...

8. BORA Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill [pdf, 308 KB]

   ...the Bill draws a distinction on the basis of race. We consider any potential issue of inconsistency with s 19 of the Bill of Rights Act arising from the establishment of the Board to be demonstrably justified under s 5 of that Act. The active protection of the indigenous people of New Zealand and those that have been historically disadvantaged is a significant and important objective. The Board furthers this objective by giving special recognition to the mana whenua and Māori of T...

9. LCRO 133/2018 RN v TL (15 April 2019) [pdf, 101 KB]

   ...that fell below a proper professional standard, further action was not necessary or appropriate. [10] Mr RN disagrees with the Committee and applied for a review. Review Application [11] Mr RN’s key concern on review was that Ms TL did not protect his life savings and instead bullied him into settling on terms he rejects as unfair. Mr RN made various comments about Ms TL’s conduct in the course of acting for him including at the judicial settlement conference when, he says,...

10. Mullane v Attorney-General (Request for Documents) [2020] NZHRRT 14 [pdf, 621 KB]

    ...following comments by way of assistance: [10.1] The order made by the Tribunal at [117] of its decision prohibiting search of the Tribunal file and directing that Mr Mullane and the Police be notified of any request to search the file was sufficient to protect the evidence on the Tribunal’s file. [10.2] In any event the Public Records Act 2005 appeared to prohibit the removal or destruction of a judicial record. 4 [10.3] It was unclear whether Mr Mullane intended his application...