Search Results

1. Legal Complaints Review Officer v Hong [2015] NZLCDT 37 [pdf, 48 KB]

   ...High Court Judge16 [32] A distinguishing feature between Mr Hong and Mr Eichelbaum is the Tribunal’s confidence that the behaviour was unlikely to be repeated by the latter practitioner. This issue weighed strongly in the assessment of public protection, and “specific deterrence” principles, which were addressed in the Tribunal’s decision. . Thus, concern as to insight is a common factor in the two decisions. 17 “….. we discussed general and specific deterrence. Whi...

2. Sionepulu v Downer and Police (Costs) [2012] NZHRRT 22 [pdf, 76 KB]

   ...Sionepulu the responsibility for bringing and prosecuting these misconceived and baseless proceedings. We take into account also the fact that Ms Sionepulu is the sole breadwinner of the family. It is safe to assume that she also carries the burden of caring for her child. Many of the complaints made by the defendants attach to Mr Butler, not to Ms Sionepulu. Yet it is she who will be legally liable to pay any costs award. She and her young child will bear the burden of Mr Butler’s...

3. Wandsworth v Ddinbych & Keith LCRO 149 & 150 / 2009 (5 March 2010) [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...Standards Committee 1 upheld complaints against two practitioners, Mr Keith (P1) and Mr Ddinbych (P2). [2] The Committee found P1 had wrongfully terminated the retainer with the Applicant in breach of Rule 4.2 of the Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care Rules, and that this constituted unsatisfactory conduct. The Committee determined that the finding of unsatisfactory conduct recorded against his professional file, and an apology, were a sufficient penalty. It declined to consi...

4. BORA Land Transport (Road Safety and Other Matters) Amendment Bill [pdf, 361 KB]

   ...range of situations in which a vehicle must be seized and impounded. Given that the person whose vehicle has been impounded or driver licence has been suspended may subsequently be prosecuted for an offence, we have considered whether the right to protection from double jeopardy, affirmed in s 26(2) of the Bill of Rights Act, is engaged. • We note that the former Attorney General’s s 7 report on the Act considered whether those provisions for mandatory vehicle impoundment and mand...

5. [2016] NZEmpC 169 Robinson v Gillon & Maher Plumbing Ltd [pdf, 152 KB]

   ...be unable to meet an adverse award of costs. That must be taken as contemplating also that an order for substantial security may, in effect, prevent the plaintiff from pursuing the claim. An order having that effect should only be made after careful consideration and in a case in which the claim has little chance of success. Access to the court’s for a genuine plaintiff is not likely to be denied. Of course, the interests of defendants must also be weighed. They must be pr...

6. [2018] NZEmpC 41 Rachelle v Air New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 343 KB]

   ...be unable to meet an adverse award of costs. That must be taken as contemplating also that an order for substantial security may, in effect, prevent the plaintiff from pursuing the claim. An order having that effect should be made only after careful consideration and in a case in which the claim has little chance of success. Access to the Courts for a genuine plaintiff is not lightly to be denied. Of course, the interest of defendants must also be weighed. They must be prote...

7. 2017 NZSSAA 066 (22 November 2017) [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...recoverable when it should have been non-recoverable. (b) The appellant was not on the correct main benefit and/or supplementary assistance and/or incorrect income tests were applied. (c) Incorrect application of assistance in relation to a childcare grant. [5] We determined on 31 March 2017 that the payments relating to childcare assistance are not within the scope of this appeal. [6] Paragraphs 16(d) and (e) of the submissions relate to whether debts arising from rent arrears...

8. Establishment of Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal (2) [pdf, 402 KB]

   ...considered by Cabinet, and will be published when the Bill is introduced to the House. 32. The RIS provides information about the development and content of proposed legislation. Its purpose is to ensure that regulatory options are subject to careful and robust analysis, and that this analysis has been independently assessed. 33. As a departmental document, a RIS summarises our advice on the impact analysis. Our analysis suggests that a combination of stand-alone mediation, and ad...

9. [2017] NZEmpC 13 Lewis v Immigration Guru Ltd [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...proposed statement of claim she regarded the agreement to be without fault. [17] The determination also considered in a conscientious way Ms Lewis’s allegations as to discrimination and disadvantage before dismissing them. The Authority Member carefully considered discrimination and disadvantage, weighing the evidence against the statutory requirements. The Authority Member considered the evidence at length and her analysis was comprehensive. In respect of the claim by Ms L...

10. [2017] NZEmpC 46 Davidson v Great Barrier Airlines Ltd [pdf, 104 KB]

    ...will be unable to meet an adverse award of costs. That must be taken as contemplating also that an order for substantial security may, in effect, prevent the plaintiff from pursuing the claim. An order having that effect should be made only after careful consideration and in a case in which the claim has little chance of success. Access to the courts for a genuine plaintiff is not lightly to be denied. [16] Of course, the interests of defendants must also be weighed. They must b...