Search Results

1. ABC v XYZ [2013] NZHRRT 25 [pdf, 117 KB]

   ...of Proceedings v Emms [2013] NZHRRT 5 (25 February 2013) at [45]: [45] In making our findings of fact and in determining whether the Director has established the breaches of the Code as alleged in the amended statement of claim we have applied the civil standard of proof (balance of probabilities) as explained by Blanchard, Tipping and McGrath JJ in Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [101] to [107]. Given the serious nature of the allegations,...

2. Justice Sector Outlook December 2016 [pdf, 758 KB]

   ...removed the 10-year limit on monitoring of child sex offenders after the end of prison sentences and allowed for deferral of parole hearings. The eventual estimated change in the prison population is +100. • Legal aid reforms. Criminal legal aid fees are to increase in stages over the next three years. Few historic Waitangi Tribunal claims remain to be completed; as these come to an end, contemporary claims will rise, but these are expected to be less costly. 3 Emerging ris...

3. Justice Sector Outlook December 2016 [pdf, 882 KB]

   ...removed the 10-year limit on monitoring of child sex offenders after the end of prison sentences and allowed for deferral of parole hearings. The eventual estimated change in the prison population is +100.  Legal aid reforms. Criminal legal aid fees are to increase in stages over the next three years. Few historic Waitangi Tribunal claims remain to be completed; as these come to an end, contemporary claims will rise, but these are expected to be less costly. 3 Emerging ris...

4. [2021] NZIACDT 20 – HT v Shaikh (27 August 2021) [pdf, 235 KB]

   ...complainant contacted Mr Shaikh to apply for another work visa. The complainant signed Immigration Advice’s services agreement 3 on the same day. Mr Shaikh signed on an unknown date. Mr Shaikh agreed to process a work visa application. The fee of $1,725 was paid on 23 September. [10] An application was created online immediately by a staff member of Immigration Advice. [11] On 24 September 2020 at 4:35pm and again at 4:37pm, the complainant emailed further supportin...

5. Auckland Standards Committee v Murray [2015] NZLCDT 6 [pdf, 142 KB]

   ...Court, to allow false evidence to be knowingly put before the Court is a very serious breach of ethics. It is probably one of the most reprehensible forms of conduct which can be undertaken by any trial lawyer. [15] The system of criminal and civil justice relies on the Courts being able to have absolute confidence in the integrity of counsel appearing. Ms Murray has demonstrated that no such confidence can be reposed in her. [16] We were referred by the Standards Committee to an...

6. [2025] NZIACDT 22 – ZZ v Wen (25 March 2025) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...without handing them over to unlicensed people. Ms Wen has also reduced the number of work visas, in favour of study visas. [19] As for the sanctions, Ms Wen expresses a willingness to pay a financial penalty. She confirms not receiving her fee of $1,000 and nor did she receive any part of the fee paid to the agent. She will comply with any training direction, but it would be a considerable hardship. A record of the professional development courses and private study undertaken...

7. [2009] NZEmpC CC 4/09 Benson v Air Nelson Ltd [pdf, 48 KB]

   ...the passenger would be charged a fee for the excess baggage. There were, however, a number of exceptions to this such as sports equipment, frequent flyers and seamen. Customer service agents also had a limited discretion to waive excess baggage fees in exceptional circumstances. On all occasions on which exceptions applied or that discretion was exercised, the reason for not collecting excess baggage charges had to be recorded. Until May 2007, this was done manually. [11] In M...

8. LCRO 195/2018 KW v LQ (26 June 2020) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...obligations under r 9.5 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules) (iii) whether LQ’s correspondence with the family was consistent with his obligations under rr 2,10, 11. (iv) whether the fees rendered by LQ are fair and reasonable for the services provided. Disclosure of key information [23] The Standards Committee determined that “the initial delays in receiving KW’s disclosure were not caused by LQ”.6 LQ provided...

9. IX v AQ & AP LCRO 57 / 2012 (23 May 2012) [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...material that he had on the matter as well as a legal aid application form completed as far as he could. By that stage KW had filed an application to strike out his appeal on the grounds that it had not been filed in time. In addition, the filing fee had not been paid and Mr IX had filed an Application for Waiver of payment of the fee. [10] The outcome of the meeting on 28 January was that Mr AQ’s firm, AEH accepted instructions from Mr IX and he was to be represented by Ms SE....

10. LCRO 52/2022 AD v OC (12 July 2024) [pdf, 244 KB]

    ...including the power to order a practitioner to pay compensation of up to a maximum of $25,000 where a person has suffered loss by reason of any act or omission of a practitioner, it has no jurisdiction to award damages for alleged breach of any civil law duty owed by a practitioner to the complainant. A claim of professional negligence is a claim of breach of a civil law duty. [45] My jurisdiction is no different. I cannot give the applicant a ruling about whether anything the r...