Search Results

1. FBN v Broadway [2019] NZIACDT 77 (28 November 2019) Sanctions [pdf, 127 KB]

   ...Ms Broadway asking her to help the complainant. [7] A written agreement for immigration services was entered into by Ms Broadway and the employer. It was signed by Ms Broadway on 10 May 2017 and earlier by the employer on 3 May 2017. The total fee was $500. [8] On the same day, Ms Broadway filed a work visa application with Immigration New Zealand on behalf of the complainant. 1 FBN v Broadway [2019] NZIACDT 70. 3 [9] The vis...

2. [2025] NZIACDT 31 – LY x Jiang (16 June 2025) [pdf, 240 KB]

   ...signed an employment contract to work as a construction worker for A Ltd (the employer). [8] On an unknown date, Mr Jiang was approached by YD, an unlicensed immigration agent (the agent), to seek a visa for the complainant. The adviser’s fee was RMB 7,000 (about NZD 1,600). Mr Jiang prepared a services agreement (signed by him on 13 April 2023). It was sent to the agent, but it was never signed by the complainant. [9] The visa application was filed by Mr Jiang with Immigrati...

3. [2025] NZIACDT 32 - CM v Jiang (16 June 2025) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...signed an employment contract to work as a construction worker for A Ltd (the employer). [8] On an unknown date, Mr Jiang was approached by YD, an unlicensed immigration agent (the agent), to seek a visa for the complainant. The adviser’s fee was RMB 7,000 (about NZD 1,600). Mr Jiang prepared a services agreement (signed by him on 13 April 2023). It was sent to the agent, but it was never signed by the complainant. [9] The visa application was filed by Mr Jiang with Immigrat...

4. LCRO 42/2019 EW v BL decision & orders (19 June 2020 & 28 July 2020) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...Background [4] EW was/is the sole director/shareholder of [Company 1]. [5] The following paragraphs contain quoted comments taken from the report issued by the costs assessor (WK) appointed by the Committee to consider and report on BL’s fees.1 [6] The company “predominantly sold [AAA] life and health insurance policies. It had been a successful business for some years.” [7] In or about 2011, EW fell ill, and made claims on two policies held with [AAA]. One of the clai...

5. 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...

6. 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...

7. [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...

8. 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...

9. 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...

10. [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...