Search Results

1. [2015] NZSSAA 105 (24 December 2015) [pdf, 46 KB]

   ...in the Chief Executive’s stead. [11] This is reinforced by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 which provides that wherever a public authority has a power to make a determination in respect of a person’s rights, obligations or interests protected by law, that Authority must apply the rules of natural justice. [12] The appellant is a client of the Ministry of Social Development’s Remote Client Unit. The Authority has been advised that this unit services clients who, due to e...

2. CAC306 v Murphy & Anor [2015] NZREADT 88 [pdf, 130 KB]

   ...[24] Professional standards must be maintained. The aspects of deterrence and denunciation must be taken into account. It is settled law that a penalty in a professional disciplinary case is primarily about the maintenance of standards and the protection of the public, but there can be an element of punishment. Disciplinary proceedings inevitably involve issues of deterrence, and penalties are designed in part to deter both the offender and others in the profession from offending in a...

3. BORA Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...discretion to admit other evidence, whether or not admissible in a court (cl. 55). 16. Of these, the first and fourth of these provisions are discretionary powers of the Tribunal and so, in order to be valid, must be exercised in accordance with BORA protections, including s 27(1): see Drew v Attorney-General [2002] 1 NZLR 58, 72. It would follow that, where fairness required an oral hearing or the rejection of particular evidence, s 27(1) would require the Tribunal to do so. 17. The...

4. [2017] NZEnvC 210 Doctors Flat Vineyard Ltd and Rubicon Hall Road Ltd v Central Otago District Council [pdf, 1.9 MB]

   ...although he conceded in cross-examination that the rezoning resulting from the Dennison submissions did not reflect the best productive use of the land.6 The court agreed that the best productive land was in fact the higher terrace, which is to be protected by the 25 year covenant now offered and accepted by the court. [8J 2 3 4 5 6 The evidence of Mr Murray that a winery building could be established as of [2017] NZEnvC 193. Applicalion for costs, daled 22 November 20...

5. Complaints Assessment Committee 408 v Reed [2017] NZREADT 34 [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...[11] The Tribunal concluded that Mr Reed’s conduct constituted “seriously negligent real estate agency work”, and thus misconduct under s 73(b) of the Act.3 Sentencing principles [12] The principal purpose of the Act is to “promote and protect the interests of consumers in respect of transactions that relate to real estate and to promote public confidence in the performance of real estate agency work.”4 The Act achieves these purposes by regulating agents, branch managers...

6. [2019] NZEmpC 41 Renaissance Assets Management Ltd v Ge [pdf, 350 KB]

   ...what happened before his dismissal. He also gave evidence about being required to pay a premium for the job. 6 Attorney-General v McVeagh [1995] 1 NZLR 558 (CA) at 566. Confirmed in Pharmacy Care Systems Ltd v Attorney-General (2001) 15 PRNZ 465 (CA) at [19]. The application [12] The application relies on the same grounds to strike out both proceedings. The crux of the application is that Mr Ge did not misrepresent hi...

7. Coma v Real Estate Agents Authority [2019] NZREADT 14 [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...that there was no error in Committee’s decision to take no further action on the complaint. In other words, Mr Coma was found by the Committee not to have breached any provision of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012, or any provision of the Act. The complainants’ contentions to the opposite effect were rejected. [32] That outcome can be seen by any person reading the decision. A reader can see that there was nothing in the complaint...

8. [2020] NZEnvC 108 Terra NZ Group Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 406 KB]

   ...3 (i) The earthworks exceeded the area of 2,600 m2 authorised by Condition 1 of the resource consent; and (ii) The culverts for the road exceeded the permitted activity standards, being longer than 30 metres and with erosion and sediment protection works in excess of 5 metres. [8] The relevant rules under the AUP appear to be Rule E3.4.1 (A33) in respect of culvert lengths and Rule E3.6.1.14 (b) in respect of the erosion and sediment protection works. These were the matters...

9. Complaints Assessment Committee 403 v Zhang [2018] NZREADT 53 [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...through a disciplinary process that is independent, transparent, and effective. Penalties for misconduct and unsatisfactory conduct are determined bearing in mind the need to maintain a high standard of conduct in the industry, the need for consumer protection, the maintenance of confidence in the industry, and the need for deterrence. [10] A penalty should be appropriate for the particular nature of the misbehaviour, and the Tribunal should endeavour to maintain consistency in pen...

10. YA & AZ v BT [2024] NZDT 765 (22 November 2024) [pdf, 118 KB]

    ...or into their roof. It also was not adequate because it created ongoing maintenance expenses and because it extended too far into their property and close to their house. The applicants further submitted that even if maintenance was currently taken care of by BT and NT, if they sold their property, a future owner of their property might not do so. 23. NT argued the hedge is attractive, healthy and provides an adequate degree of privacy for the occupants of each property. NT provided r...