Search Results

1. Hinckley v Macduff LCRO 169 / 2009 (28 January 2010) [pdf, 158 KB]

   ...Ms Macduff was heard through her counsel Mr XX. Background [4] Dissention had arisen between JH and his brothers in respect of the administration of a family trust. The trust had owned the family home of their parents Mr & Mrs Hinckley. [5] Mr & Mrs Hinckley ceased occupying that home and by agreement (recorded in a deed of 29 March 2006) the home had been sold to JH with a payment to the trust which was distributed to the other brothers. A further payment of an outstanding...

2. Kidderminster v Orkney & Kiddwelly LCRO 37 / 2010 (3 November 2010) [pdf, 123 KB]

   ...the light of the extensive period of credit extended to the Applicant and her family. The evidence shows that the Applicant and her family had full and free input into the terms of the agreement, and would have been well aware of the interest clause. This is an agreed term of the fees arrangement. Nor do I accept that the allegation that the Practitioners threatened to abandon their case if fees were not paid. This was fully addressed by the Standards Committee and its conclusion...

3. PGP & QGP v FS LCRO 143/2014 (27 August 2015) [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...Mrs GP’s home was located in close proximity to the home they were selling. 2 [4] Mr JS was accompanied at the meeting by his father Mr FS, a solicitor, and his brother. It is Mr FS who is the subject of the disciplinary complaint. [5] Mr and Mrs GP maintain that they made it clear at the meeting with members of the FS family that they could only negotiate a deal if they were certain that the purchasers had not been introduced to the property by the real estate agent. The...

4. [2018] NZEmpC 98 Ovation NZ Ltd v The NZ Meat Workers and Related Trades Union [pdf, 343 KB]

   ...Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act). The defendant pleads that the plaintiffs require work to be performed during breaks in the form of “doffing and stowing and sterilising equipment and gear and donning such equipment and gear for use”. [5] That assertion is pleaded by the defendant in support of its contention that the plaintiffs have not provided paid rest breaks to piece-rate workers. But it is also the basis of a counterclaim, in which a declaration is sought that the...

5. Bahramitash & Goundar v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 402) [2017] NZREADT 8 [pdf, 228 KB]

   BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2017] NZREADT 8 READT 070/15 IN THE MATTER OF An appeal under section 111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN PARSOA (SHAUN) BAHRAMITASH Appellant AND THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 402) First Respondent AND RAJA RITESH Second Respondent READT 001/16 BETWEEN SHALENDRA GOUNDAR Appellant AND THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 402) Respondent

6. [2021] NZEmpC 178 Guan v Jay.Co Ltd [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...her case and gave evidence in Mandarin. Mrs Lisha He called three witnesses who were employees of JAY.CO at relevant times. Two of these witnesses gave their evidence in Mandarin. A Mandarin interpreter was present to assist the Court. [5] The question for the Court is whether the Authority erred either in fact or law concerning each of the three issues outlined above. I will consider these issues on a sequential basis, summarising the conclusions reached by the Authority in...

7. [2024] NZEmpC 6 C3 Ltd v O’Brien [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...the Court. The key facts follow: (a) C3 Ltd provides stevedoring services at the Auckland port operated by Ports of Auckland Ltd (POAL). Like any port, the workplace is 1 O’Brien v C3 Ltd [2023] NZERA 612 (Member Larmer). 2 At [8]–[52]. considered a high-risk working environment from a health and safety perspective. It is an environment where a large number of different parties interact within a restricted space and it involves the use of heavy machinery, ov...

8. Fraser v Accident Compensation Corporation (Personal Injury) [2023] NZACC 141 [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2023] NZACC 141 ACR 18/22 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN ALISTER FRASER Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 15 March 2023 Heard at: Wellington Appearances: M Williams for appellant (by AVL) B Marten and T Lynskey for respondent (in person) Judgment: 30 August 2023 ______________________________________________________________...

9. B Ltd v NK & KX [2025] NZDT 28 (27 January 2025) [pdf, 177 KB]

   CI0301_CKX_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 9 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2025] NZDT 28 APPLICANT B Ltd RESPONDENT NK SECOND RESPONDENT KX The Tribunal orders: NK and KX are jointly and severally liable to pay B Ltd the sum of $33,977.31 on or before 28 February 2025. Reasons 1. NK and KX engaged B Ltd to design a holiday home for them on a property in [Town A]. A written contract was entered betwee

10. LCRO 135/2024 FA v TK and GY (25 March 2025) [pdf, 184 KB]

    LEGAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW OFFICER ĀPIHA AROTAKE AMUAMU Ā-TURE [2025] NZLCRO 037 Ref: LCRO 135/2024 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a decision of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN FA Applicant AND TK and GY Respondents The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. DECISION Introduction [1] The app