Search Results

1. Dovey Property Holdings Limited – Orokawa 3B Part Lot 8 DP41892 (2013) 57 Taitokerau MB 75 (57 TTK 75) [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...[6] Of more significance, the application revealed a significant schism between Mr Regeling and some of his and his late wife’s adult children. The main reason for the drawn out hearings was that I gave Mr Peters an opportunity to assist the family to resolve their differences. [7] Ultimately, by 22 May 2012 the family had not resolved their differences and Jacob Regeling Junior no longer supported the application. Jacob Regeling Junior’s stance took Mr Peters by surprise wh...

2. Fitikefu v Department of Corrections (Strike-Out Application) [2019] NZHRRT 51 [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...http://www.lexisnexis.com/nz/legal/search/enhRunRemoteLink.do?linkInfo=F%23NZ%23nzlr%23sel1%252007%25vol%253%25year%252007%25page%25721%25sel2%253%25&A=0.054635941823442336&backKey=20_T27980152881&service=citation&ersKey=23_T27980152873&langcountry=NZ http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2010/0110/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM2033251#DLM2033251 4 [34.1] The High Court, the District Court, the Family Court, or a Disputes Tribunal; or [34.2] The Employment Court, the Envir...

3. LCRO 86/2022 PR v KG and VW (12 November 2024) [pdf, 499 KB]

   LEGAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW OFFICER ĀPIHA AROTAKE AMUAMU Ā-TURE [2024] NZLCRO 140 Ref: LCRO 86/2022 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN PR Applicant AND KG and VW Respondents The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed Introduction [1] Mrs PR has app

4. National Standards Committee v Shand [2019] NZLCDT 2 [pdf, 3.2 MB]

   ...issued after direct discussions between Mr Bligh and the defendants had proved unsuccessful. Mr Bligh was aware that the defendants relied on evidence from independent experts which contradicted his observations and experience, corroborated by a family member. He had also taken independent advice but that advice was challenged as not being “expert” in nature. [48] This contest in the evidence was known to CRS from the outset of its funding agreement. As preparation for trial...

5. Coroners-Court-Annual-Report-2023-WEB.pdf [pdf, 977 KB]

   ...observer of human nature, and with an amateur psychologist mindset, employment law offered the opportunity to use my legal skills as well as feed my interest in people. Employment law served up some intriguing scenarios. In addition to workplace disputes, I was advising in relation to workplace accidents and fatalities. I also sat on a New Zealand Law Society National Standards Committee and had been engaged as an external investigator inquiring into complex workplace issues. With a q...

6. LCRO 83/2024 AGM v CPF (24 March 2025) [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. Introduction [1] Ms AGM has applied for a review of a decision by the [Area] Standards Committee. Background [2] CPF (Mr F) sought advice from Ms AGM in respect to a dispute he was engaged in with his brother, RKF. [3] RKF was known to his family as RK.1 1 I will reference Mr RKF in this decision as "RK". 2 [4] Ms AGM was, at the time of taking instructions, a senior associate with the la...

7. LCRO 3/2017 and LCRO 148/2017 McDonnell v LA (28 June 2019) [pdf, 436 KB]

   ...Law Society Complaints Service (the Complaints Service) on 12 May 2016. The substance of her complaint was that: (a) the first asset schedule produced by Ms McDonnell was incorrect. It took 15 months to rectify and caused profound and lasting family disharmony; (b) Ms LA incurred costs in moving in order to protect herself from death threats from one of her siblings. These threats were connected to her position in relation to her father’s estate; (c) the delay and incorre...

8. Taylor v Corrections (Admissibility of Evidence) [2016] NZHRRT 10 [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...contemplation against Corrections. That litigation is apparently still ongoing. Mr Hunter alleges Corrections staff were shown in those proceedings to have provided “knowingly dishonest” information to the Courts. [29] Unsurprisingly, Corrections disputes this allegation and again says that if the evidence is admitted it will need to prepare evidence in response. [30] We do not see how an investigation by the Tribunal into an allegation made in other (unspecified) proceedings will...

9. Decisions-about-special-patient-leave-and-change-of-legal-status.pdf [pdf, 6.1 MB]

   ...health care iii. a Maori member appropriately knowledgeable in tikanga and matauranga Maori iv. a lawyer with appropriate qualifications and practice experience Agree that decisions of a Special Patient Review Tribunal may be appealed to the Family Court Agree that procedural arrangements for the Special Patient Review Tribunal mirror those of the existing Mental Health Review Tribunal Agree that any necessary amendments be made to the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons...

10. [2023] NZREADT 11 - CAC 2103 v Lieven (15 May 2023) [pdf, 263 KB]

    ...turn now to consider two preliminary issues which have bearing on our consideration of the charges. Are the decisions of the TT and the [court] admissible in the Tribunal? Submissions [36] Section 50 of the Evidence Act 2006 provides: 50 Civil judgment as evidence in civil or criminal proceedings (1) Evidence of a judgment or a finding of fact in a civil proceeding is not admissible in a criminal proceeding or another civil proceeding to prove the existence of a fact that was in...