Search Results

1. INZ (Gilray) v Singh [2019] NZIACDT 61 (3 September 2019) Sanctions [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...dealing with an intermediary in the Philippines. There was no deliberate or dishonest conduct. Mr Singh had acknowledged his errors and confirmed that he had changed his practice. [15] Mr Moses notes that the clients themselves were not charged fees in relation to the services provided since Eagle Migration’s fees were paid by the employer. There was no specific prejudice to the clients. They were successful in terms of the immigration outcomes sought. [16] It was furthe...

2. COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill [pdf, 687 KB]

   ...proposed infringement offence for failure to provide or update contact information is in due proportion to the objective of ensuring MIQF is economically sustainable. Entrants to MIQF come to New Zealand with the knowledge that they are expected to pay fees for their stay, and there is no legitimate reason to avoid paying this debt. 8. I note that the MIQF system has been set up at pace as part of the pandemic response, meaning operational processes are not fully developed. The collectio...

3. [2023] NZIACDT 2 - DD v Pabellon (5 January 2023) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...$500 – $1,000 5 would be appropriate. The suggested magnitude is in line with other sanctions decisions concerning a lack of due care and diligence. (4) Ms Pabellon has already refunded $2,300 and accepts a full refund, including the fees of Immigration NZ, would be appropriate. This amounts to a further $6,450. (5) There is no evidence that the complainant would have succeeded with the residence application but for Ms Pabellon’s breach. Under these circumstances...

4. [2022] NZIACDT 23 - TQ v Gibson - Sanctions (7 September 2022) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...caused by Ms Gibson’s negligence. Submissions from Ms Gibson [17] In her submissions (16 August 2022), Ms Gibson says she felt very sorry for the stress and disruption that her actions had caused the complainant so she had refunded the full fee, which had been paid in 2019 to the previous owner of the business. This had therefore come at a great expense to her business. [18] Ms Gibson drew attention to the following factors: (1) This was her first appearance before the Trib...

5. [2021] NZACDT 14 - YC v Wan (29 June 2021) [pdf, 133 KB]

   ...as she wished to apply for an essential skills work visa. [7] A written client agreement was entered into between Mr Wan and the complainant on 10 June 2019. On the following day, the complainant paid $1,995 to the consultancy, comprising a fee of $1,500 and Immigration New Zealand’s fee of $495. [8] It was, however, Ms Han who worked exclusively with the complainant to prepare and, on 28 June 2019, to file the visa application. 1 YC v Wan [2021] NZIACDT 10. 2 YC v Ha...

6. [2022] NZIACDT 21 - CT v Nandan (18 August 2022) [pdf, 215 KB]

   ...complainant continued to intermittently communicate. He sent a text to her on 5 January 2020 stating that he had instructed her to proceed on 24 October 2019, but at 25 December, the application had not been lodged. He asked for the return of the fees. She replied to say the contract did not allow for refunds. The complainant then responded on 7 January accepting that there would be no refund if he 1 Letter Nandan to the Authority (17 August 2021) at [1h]. 3 changed his...

7. [2021] NZIACDT 23 - CL v Khetarpal (24 September 2021) [pdf, 228 KB]

   ...reapplying for a licence for two years. [21] The complainant seeks compensation of $18,886.81: Refund $ 3,246.00 Solicitors’ fee $10,640.81 Anguish and distress $ 5,000.00 $18,886.81 [22] The complainant paid $3,000 in professional fees to Ms Khetarpal and $246 to Immigration NZ for the failed applications of herself and her husband. They failed because Ms Khetarpal did not provide the necessary information to the agency. [23] The complainant seeks $10,640.81, be...

8. Directory of Official Information 2019 P-R [pdf, 1.5 MB]

   Directory of Official Information Listings P-R About This is a living document. We endeavour to update it whenever there are changes to be made. If your department or agency’s information is out of date, please email oia@justice.govt.nz with the necessary amendments. We can send you a MS Word version if you need. Ministerial Relations and Services Strategy, Governance & Finance Ministry of Justice | Tāhū o te Ture oia@justice.govt.nz

9. Nelson Standards Committee v Ord [2025] NZLCDT 4 (17 January 2025) [pdf, 252 KB]

   ...lawyer taking on instructions outside the ambit of his or her expertise. [2] Dr Ord was well motivated when he agreed to represent the complainant, who told him she was unable to find a lawyer to represent her. However, his unfamiliarity with civil litigation led him into error, and those errors only compounded as time went on and the proceedings grew more complicated. Dr Ord persisted in trying to advance the proceedings, essentially making matters worse as he did so. As a ba...

10. [2025] NZREADT 13 – OQ v McLean & Knowles (8 May 2020) [pdf, 186 KB]

    ...compensatory order should be made and none of the factors specified in s 110A of the Act indicate that any costs should be awarded against the licensees. DISCUSSION [16] The Tribunal’s approach to costs awards is not the same as the approach in civil courts. In all proceedings before the Tribunal, the starting point for the power to order costs comes from s 110A of the Act. That is, the Tribunal may take into account whether, and to what extent, any party to the proceedings—...