Search Results

1. [2023] NZIACDT 16 - WS v Lawlor (9 May 2023) [pdf, 234 KB]

   ...exercise due care to file the assessment application with NZQA in a timely manner, in breach of cl 1. (8) Failed to provide a new or amended written agreement for the assessment, in breach of cl 18(a). (9) Failed to provide invoices for the fees paid, in breach of cl 22. 4 (10) Failed to ensure the refund obligation could be met, in breach of cls 24(b), 25(a), (e) and (f). (11) Failed to promptly pay the refund, in breach of cl 24(c). SUBMISSIONS Submissions fro...

2. CAC 20004 v Kolich & Anor [2014] NZREADT 66 [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...Agents Authority as to the appropriate penalty but nothing has been received from Mr Vithal. [6] The Complaints Assessment Committee submit that the appropriate penalty for Mr Vithal is: [a] An order that Mr Vithal repay the “consultant’s fee” that he received without a written agency agreement. [b] That he be fined. The Complaints Assessment Committee suggest a “mid level” fine. 1 [1990] 2 All ER 263 2 [1992] 1 NZLR 7...

3. LCRO 38/2019 & 151/2019 Yuri Lukas v ZE (30 January 2020) [pdf, 167 KB]

   ...pursuant to s 156(1)(b); b. Mr Lukas pay compensation to Mrs ZE of $930.00, being the cost of the replacement medical examinations, pursuant to s 156(1)(d); c. Mr Lukas cancel his fee pursuant to s 156(f); d. Mr Lukas refund to Mrs ZE all unrefunded fees paid by her in relation to her work visa and family’s visa applications pursuant to s 156(g); e. Mr Lukas pay to the New Zealand Law Society a fine of $1,500.00 pursuant to s 156(1)(i); and...

4. [2023] NZIACDT 5 - SM v KIM (15 February 2023) [pdf, 253 KB]

   ...been declined a visa, an application that had not involved Mr Kim. Mr Kim’s employee found him a job with the same employer who had offered him the job linked to the earlier declined visa. Mr Kim invoiced the employer a substantial recruitment fee, in addition to invoicing the complainant a fee for the visa. Both fees were paid by the employer. Some years later, the complainant made a complaint against Mr Kim to the Immigration Advisers Authority (the Authority) about the size o...

5. LCRO 97/2019 DH v MB (29 June 2020) [pdf, 273 KB]

   ...has been deficient to the extent that merits a disciplinary response, the evidence to support that finding must be sufficiently strong to meet the requisite standard of proof. In disciplinary proceedings such as this the standard of proof is the civil standard, the balance of probabilities, to be applied flexibly according to the nature of the case.21 20 Email, Ms WH to LCRO (25 June 2020). 21 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committe...

6. Eichelbaum v CAC 303 & White [2016] NZREADT 30 [pdf, 134 KB]

   ...intended to provide a flexible, efficient and low cost method of determining appeals from Committee decisions. For this reason, the Tribunal is able to regulate its own procedure and is not bound by traditional rules of evidence, ss 105(1) and 109. No fees are charged for bringing an appeal. … 4. Interlocutory Applications 4.1 This appeal has involved a high number of interlocutory applications. It is submitted that the approach being taken in this regard is not consistent...

7. Lohr v Accident Compensation Corporation (Costs) [2016] NZHRRT 36 [pdf, 60 KB]

   ...to assess the importance of access to justice that its jurisdiction can provide and the consequences of adverse costs awards being made too readily. … … [61] I consider the Tribunal is right to express caution about applying the conventional civil costs regime to its jurisdiction. Statutory tribunals exist “in order to provide simpler, speedier, cheaper, and more accessible justice than do the ordinary courts.” The imposition of large fees to bring a claim and the imposition of...

8. Legal aid guidance for lawyers applying for approval as a legal aid provider [pdf, 80 KB]

   ...may have in relation to the grant of legal aid and your rights as an applicant or recipient of legal aid. You should be aware at this time that legal aid is not always free. You may be required to repay your legal aid grant and pay a user charge fee. If you have to pay a user charge, this will be deducted from my first invoice to the Ministry and I will collect the money from you. The user charge is always $50; this cannot be changed and you can only be exempt if you are making a sp...

9. Q v I [2018] NZIACDT 16 (18 June 2018) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...generally regulates the profession, and it is necessary to deal these cases to achieve the objectives set out in s 3 of the Act. [26.3] The Tribunal is the only body given the powers to suspend licenses, cancel licences, or order the refund of fees and compensation. Those powers are potentially required to deal with the consequences of incapacity where a practitioner lacks awareness. [26.4] The Act has some indications that the Tribunal is not solely concerned with “disciplina...

10. [2023] NZIACDT 27 BT v Li (2 November 2023) [pdf, 209 KB]

    ...understood that the complainant approached Ms Li. The client signed a service agreement with Fayo on 23 March 2021. Fayo undertook to file a s 61 request for a partnership work visa and later an application for a partnership resident visa. The fee for the s 61 request was $2,500. If the work was terminated, the fee would be based on the hours worked at $300 per hour. [6] On 10 May 2021, Ms Li filed with Immigration NZ a request for a partnership work visa under s 61 on behalf...