Search Results

1. Auckland District Law Society v Mathias [2010] NZLCDT 10 [pdf, 42 KB]

   ...publication occur. [13] We do not have evidence as to the process by which the decision about non-opposition to Mr Mathias’ practising on his own account was reached. We make the comment that in future such applications will undoubtedly need to be carefully scrutinised by the Society before there is agreement or non-opposition to a practitioner applying to recommence practice on his own account. [14] The Society seeks costs in respect of the considerable work which has been put...

2. GH v UF LCRO 22 / 2011 (9 November 2011) [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...always sent to the Applicant‟s lawyer. The Practitioner did not represent the Applicant and did not have direct contact with him. [29] The Applicant had legal representation throughout. It was the responsibility of the Applicant‟s lawyer to protect his interests. This was not the responsibility of the Practitioner who acted for the party on the other side of a transaction. If the Practitioner subsequently advanced a position contrary to an earlier position, then it is to be...

3. Appellant v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 410) & Geoffrey Twigden [2017] NZREADT 79 [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...person’s knowledge of and experience in the industry may equally be regarded as a relevant mitigating factor when assessing penalty. [25] The purpose of the requirement to provide written appraisals, and copies of the approved guide, is to protect the interests of who use licensees’ services, as vendors or as customers. We accept Ms Mok’s submission that in the present case, it was open to the Committee to take into account [the trustee owners’] experience in the real estat...

4. Canterbury District Law Society v Wood [2009] NZLCDT 11 [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...of months culminating in the deliberately misleading response, a planned response to enquiries made, involving deceit, and a deliberate misleading of a fellow practitioner and the Court. [19] Mr Wood claimed that his response was necessary to protect what he saw as his client’s best interests. As a matter of fact we doubt that what he did was in his client’s best interests, but quite apart from that issue, such a response is not open to a practitioner. Deliberately misleading th...

5. [2017] NZEnvC 022 J Lenihan & Others v Auckland Council [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...noted as Proposed Appel/ants (with the exception of Mr Frizzell, who has not actively participated) have lodged submissions in support of the their positions, and I shall return to those shortly. [3] The Council, supported by the Waitakere Ranges Protection Society Inc (in respect of the Lenihan appeal), Dickson Yachting Ltd and Housing New Zealand Corporation (in respect of the Puhoi Community Forum appeal), submits that those persons do not have such a right of appeal. It needs to...

6. BORA Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...limitations on the presumption of innocence. In R v Oakes the Supreme Court of Canada held that the presumption of supply served a pressing social objective and that this objective was of sufficient importance to warrant overriding a constitutionally protected right or freedom in certain cases.3 16. A majority of the Court in Hansen also appeared to accept that controlling the risk posed to society by the supply of marijuana was a significant and important objective. The previous At...

7. Nguyen v Hu [2016] NZIACDT 24 (16 May 2016) [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...immigration matters, between January 2012 and April 2013. Mr Hu was aware that the complainant had limited English language skills, and often required an interpreter to assist. [3.2] On 2 November 2012, Immigration New Zealand wrote to the complainant care of Mr Hu. In this letter Immigration New Zealand gave notice the complainant had her visitor visa application approved, but should provide a police clearance certificate (PCC), less than 6 months old. The letter prominently notified t...

8. WD v KG LCRO 185/2015 [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...were to be achieved. (e) Lawyer failed to provide information about the services to be provided. (f) Lawyer failed to act with instructions, and with his advice. (g) Lawyer failed to communicate in a respectful manner. (h) Lawyer failed to protect and promote our interests. (i) Lawyer failed to provide information about the progress of the case. (j) Lawyer failed to provide necessary support to find another lawyer. (k) Lawyer failed to provide information as to how to pursue a c...

9. [2019] NZEnvC 146 Awaroa Aerodrome Ltd v Tasman District Council [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...dependent on detailed and contestable assessments of the underlying factual and legal issues. Instead of referring the matter to Council's lawyers for further advice it issued an infringement notice which forced Awaroa to file this appeal to protect its position.17 [20] Awaroa contends that this appeal would have been avoided if the Council had acted in a reasonable manner. Section 285 RMA [21] Under s285 RMA, the court may order any party to proceedings before it to pay to...

10. OWRUG - EiC - J M H Manson (5 Feb 2021) [pdf, 137 KB]

    ...impact of careless agriculture on water quality and aquatic life, we highlighted the interest and views held by other people in the community and looked for solutions that provided reliability of irrigation supply alongside the importance of protecting the environment within which we all live and operate. 5 PP-1035600-2-292-V1 17. MCWSG wrote newsletters, held woolshed and pod meetings, arranged information visits to farms in other catchments, we hosted professional sp...