Search Results

1. Hawkes Bay Standards Committee v Beacham [2012] NZLCDT 29 [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...interest (which include “protection of the public”), to maintain professional standards, to impose sanctions on a practitioner for breach of his/her duties, and to provide scope for rehabilitation in appropriate cases. Tribunals are required to carefully consider alternatives to striking off a practitioner. If the purposes of imposing disciplinary sanctions can be achieved short of striking off then it is the lesser alternative that should be adopted as the proportionate response....

2. Canterbury Standards Committee v A Practitioner [2015] NZLCDT 44 [pdf, 41 KB]

   ...context he submitted that ‘fraudulent’ had a wider meaning than fraud in a criminal sense. He queried why otherwise would the word ‘criminal’ be used in the rule. He argued that narrowing the interpretation of the word would reduce the protection of the public and would undermine the purpose of the legislation as provided for in ss 3 and 4 of the Act for the maintenance of public confidence. 7 [27] The Tribunal has determined that it is not necessary to resolve the ar...

3. Auckland Standards Committee 5 v Yoo [2016] NZLCDT 35 [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...responsibility, has led to him setting matters in order and we will refer more specifically to that under the discussion of “mitigation”. [5] We record, as has been said many times, that the purposes of penalty in the disciplinary jurisdiction is to protect the public, to maintain the standards of the legal profession, to maintain the reputation of the profession and the public’s confidence in it as a result. [6] The starting point for assessing proper penalty is to consid...

4. [2025] NZREADT 43 KE v REAA (24 October 2025) [pdf, 115 KB]

   ...Estate Agents Authority (the Authority) on the ground that it was inconsequential. [2] The complaint is against BH (the licensee). It is alleged by the applicant that the licensee breached the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012 (the Rules). BACKGROUND [3] The licensee is a licensed salesperson who works for [the agency] and did so at all relevant times. [4] The applicant contacted the licensee through TradeMe regarding a property the lice...

5. Professor Simon Francis Thrush - Evidence in Chief [pdf, 2.7 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT Auckland Registry ENV 2015 AKL 0000134 IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal under Clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Act TRUSTEES OF MOTITI ROHE MOANATRUST Appellant BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF PROFESSOR SIMON FRANCIS THRUSH ON BEHALF OF MOTITI ROHE MOANA TRUST 25th October 2017 Counsel Acting RB Enright Barrister Level 1, Stanbeth House 28 C

6. Slinger v Zhou [2015] NZIACDT 38 (15 April 2015) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...before commencing work that incurred costs (clause 8(b)). [8.2] That Ms Zhou breached clauses 1.1(a) and (b) of the 2010 Code; those provisions required Ms Zhou to perform her services and carryout the lawful informed instructions of clients with due care, diligence, respect and professionalism. The particulars of the alleged breaches of those obligations were: [8.2.1] In July 2011, the applicants engaged Ms Zhou to submit an expression of interest and an application for a residence vi...

7. LCRO 190/2020 JG v VK (23 March 2021) [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...conduct. [134] I am satisfied that Ms JG’s predicament was, to a significant degree, occasioned by the unhappy outcome of a convergence of circumstances which had regrettably impeded the process of registering a border alert which would have protected Ms JG from what she correctly perceived to be, imminent threat of her husband removing the child. [135] Whilst I consider, with the benefit of the minute scrutiny that frequently accompanies the luxury of hindsight analysis, that t...

8. LCRO 112/2024 BA obo DO and YW v NC (30 May 2025) [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...disclosing his relationship with Mr LM. Application for review [17] Mr BA on behalf of Mr DO and Mr YW, filed an application for review on 5 September 2024.3 [18] He submits that: 2 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (Conduct and Client Care Rules). 3 Mr BA filed the review application in his name. The application is advanced on behalf of his clients. 6 (a) had the Committee brought a more objective analysis to an examination of the...

9. LCRO 162/2018 BQ v XR (29 September 2020) [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...clear that from the outset that Mr BQ considered that it would be appropriate to have the terms of the separation recorded in a relationship property agreement. [77] He advised Mr XR a formal agreement would ensure that his position was better protected and put him less at risk of the terms of the separation being vulnerable to later challenge. [78] I think it reasonable for Mr BQ to have adopted that view. His approach presents as conventional. Mr BQ had formed a view that term...

10. MOJ0504-Making-a-parenting-plan-workbook-Arabic.pdf [pdf, 2.8 MB]

    ...أو اتباع هذا الرابط: justice.govt.nz/consent-order اتصل بهاتف وزارة العدل عىل الرقم املجاين 733 224 0800 امسحني ضوئياً بكامريا هاتفك 22 https://www.justice.govt.nz/family/care-of-children/parenting-through-a-break-up/agree-on-a-parenting-plan/apply-for-a-consent-order/ ماذا تفعل إذا مل يتم اتباع خطة رعاية أولياء األمور تستطيع: أن تتحدث إىل الشخص ا...