Search Results

1. [2025] NZIACDT 12 - XI v Liu (18 February 2025) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...1. A reasonable penalty would be $1,000 to ensure similar mistakes do not occur in the future. 2. Retraining is unnecessary. 3. A remedy for the complainant is not appropriate. The wrongdoing is acknowledged, but he only charged a fair fee and worked diligently for the complainant. He is the victim of the incident. The complainant should seek a remedy from the party who received the money. 5 JURISDICTION [18] The Tribunal’s jurisdiction to impose sanctions is se...

2. [2025] NZIACDT 13 – HG v Liu (18 February 2025) [pdf, 108 KB]

   ...1. A reasonable penalty would be $1,000 to ensure similar mistakes do not occur in the future. 2. Retraining is unnecessary. 3. A remedy for the complainant is not appropriate. The wrongdoing is acknowledged, but he only charged a fair fee and worked diligently for the complainant. He is the victim of the incident. The complainant should seek a remedy from the party who received the money. JURISDICTION [18] The Tribunal’s jurisdiction to impose sanctions is set out i...

3. [2025] NZIACDT 38 – LY v Jiang (30 July 2025) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...an employment contract to work as a construction worker for a building company (the employer). [8] On an unknown date, Mr Jiang was approached by 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 Immigra...

4. LCRO 133/2017 AD v BE (18 September 2019) [pdf, 349 KB]

   ...Mr GT to act in a “wrong way”. (b) Mr AD never expressed any concerns to Mr BE and did not give that as a reason for terminating [EJP]’s retainer. (c) He believes that Mr AD terminated the retainer when Mr BE refused to pay further legal fees. (d) He otherwise relies on the submissions made to the Standards Committee. Review on the papers [56] This review been undertaken pursuant to s 206(2) of the Act, which allows a Legal Complaints Review Officer (LCRO) to conduct an...

5. [2025] NZIACDT 36 – BL v Schoeller (17 July 2025) [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...am) and later a text (at 11:35 am) stating the complainant would need to fill out the attached questionnaire and book a personal consultation, so Ms Schoeller could inform her of the options and later provide a written summary. The consultation fee was $195.50. It would be scheduled as soon as the questionnaire was completed. She would also need certain documents, which were identified. Ms Schoeller was available at 4 pm that day. [10] On the same day, 1 February 2023 (at 1:34...

6. Matthews v Matthews - Estate of Graham Ngahina Matthews [2016] Māori Appellate Court 212 (2016 APPEAL 212) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...justification for two senior counsel would normally be established at the outset of the proceedings, which did not occur here; (b) Mr Porter’s costs are not supported by an invoice. [29] In terms of disbursements, Mr Watson accepts the filing fee and accommodation claims for one counsel however he opposes the sum incurred for preparation of affidavit evidence for previously stated reasons. Mr Watson also accepts that $454.50 is appropriate to be reimbursed in full by the respo...

7. ENVC Hearing 6Oct14 AT evidence chief Appendix A 2012 bylaw [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...residents’ only parking area for the exclusive use of a person who resides in the vicinity. (b) a residents’ exemption parking area for the use of a person who resides in the vicinity. (2) Auckland Transport may by resolution prescribe- (a) any fees to be paid annually or in any other specified manner, for the use by persons residing in the vicinity of a parking place; and (b) the manner by which any fees may be paid for the use of a parking place by persons residing in the v...

8. LCRO 25/2016 RZ v LB [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...RZ, being also a director, object to proceedings against himself: [W]e as lawyers of the company will not be in a position to continue the proceedings, unless derivative action proceedings were commenced … [which would] incur significant legal fees and court costs … [I]f proceedings were commenced against Mr RZ there [was] a risk that the company would be made liable for indemnity costs if the proceedings…[did] not succeed. 6 (f) Aware by 29 May 2015 that Mr RZ did not con...

9. [2016] NZSSAA 081 (29 August 2016) [pdf, 133 KB]

   ...party provided that the developer agrees. In this circumstance, no payment is due to the developer if the assignment is to a close relative. If the assignment is to a third party, an amount of 5% is payable to the developer for administration fees. [33] Subclause (d) of the definition of cash asset in the Ministerial Direction indicates that the equity in any property should be regarded as a cash asset. The appellant’s asset is his interest or bundle of rights in the contract t...

10. Complaints Assessment Committee 408 v Nicholas Schembri, Joseph Lupi & Timothy Kearins [2017] NZREADT 56 [pdf, 272 KB]

    ...21 First Choice Wellington (Century 21) under READT 056/16. Century 21 were found guilty of unsatisfactory conduct and the following penalty was imposed: (a) Century 21 was censured. (b) Century 21 was ordered to reduce, cancel or refund the fees charged for the work that was the subject of the complaint to the amount of $23,920.00; and (c) Century 21 was ordered to pay the Complainant costs and expenses incurred in bringing the complaint to the amount of $4,347.83 plus GST....