Search Results

1. Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Ravelich [2020] NZLCDT 3 [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...refers to conduct “that occurs at a time when the lawyer is providing regulated services” it does not require there to be a subsisting lawyer/client relationship with a particular client.” 8A (Eichelbaum) v Canterbury Westland Standards Committee No. 2 of the New Zealand Law Society [2015] NZHC 1896, 12 August 2015, Venning J. 9 Deliu v National Standards Committee and Standards Committee No. 1 of the New Zealand Law Society [2017] NZH...

2. [2017] NZEmpC 94 Crimson Consulting Ltd v Berry [pdf, 268 KB]

   ...which it may be inferred that the Court of Appeal did not consider there was a material divergence of views. [85] There was one other post Erceg judgment of the Court of Appeal to which reference should be made. In Joint Action Funding Ltd v Eichelbaum, the Court when fixing a timetable as to whether a suppression order should be made, directed the parties to explain “… why a suppression order is warranted in light of the 43...

3. [2019] NZREADT 39 - Feschiev - Ruling [pdf, 294 KB]

   ...investigation), Mr Feschiev pointed out what he said were untrue statements, and set out what he said was evidence of the untruthfulness. In large part, his responses referred to email communications. 3 See Eichelbaum v Real Estate Agents Authority [2016] NZREADT 3. [62] We do not consider that we would be assisted by hearing oral cross-examination. Accordingly, we decline leave for evidence to be given by Mr Zlatkov, and for c...

4. [2019] NZEmpC 166 GEA Process Engineering Ltd v Schicker [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...prosecute all or part of the plaintiff’s proceeding to trial and judgment; or (b) the defendant fails to prosecute all or part of the defendant’s counterclaim to trial and judgment. [42] In Lovie v Medical Assurance Society New Zealand Ltd,10 Eichelbaum CJ, in dealing with the application of the rule, stated: ... the applicant must show that the plaintiff has been guilty of inordinate delay, that such delay is inexcusable, and that it has seriously prejudiced the defendant...

5. Eichelbaum report [pdf, 441 KB]

   ...The test to be applied 11.3 Whether doubts render convictions unsafe & warrant grant of pardon 12. Concluding remarks Appendices A. Professor Davies – CV B. Professor Davies – Report C. Dr Sas – CV D. Dr Sas – Report E. Sir Thomas Eichelbaum – CV 4 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Terms of Reference (1)(a)(i) (review of overseas reports & memoranda) The review has shown that the New Zealand methodology of 1991 for interviewing children in suspected abuse cases was well up w...

6. Auckland Standards committee 2 v Burcher Short [2015] NZLCDT 47 [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...[78] While there was also a ground advanced as to family members sharing the same name, we noted in our interim decision that was given little weight. That is really the only ground remaining and we consider, having regard to the decision in Eichelbaum that it is insufficient in the present matter to displace the starting point of openness contained in s 240 of the LCA. There is simply insufficient evidence to justify a finding that the interests of the practitioners and their fami...

7. Chand and Kumari v Prakash [2012] NZIACDT 85 (3 December 2012) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...8 judgment, to be made by the tribunal as an informed and expert body on all the facts of the case. [30] As a Full Court observed in McDonald v Canterbury District Law Society (High Court, Wellington, M 215/87, 10 August 1989, Eichelbaum CJ, Heron and Ellis JJ) at p 12: Even in the absence of dishonesty, striking-off will be appropriate where there has been a serious breach of a solicitor’s fundamental duties to his client. [31] It is important to bear in mind tha...

8. [2024] NZEnvC 102 Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Inc v West Coast Regional Council [pdf, 273 KB]

   ...[30] In reply submissions, F&B refers to additional cases where a party who had conducted litigation using an in-house lawyer, was able to recover costs; Henderson Borough Council v Auckland Regional Authority,21 Joint Action Funding Ltd v Eichelbaum,22 McGuire v Secretary for Justice,23 and Royal Forest & Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Inc v Northland Regional Council.24 [31] While none of these cases involve RMA proceedings, counsel submits that there is no princ...

9. Khan v Khetarpal [2016] NZIACDT 6 (22 January 2016) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...difficult exercise of judgment, to be made by the tribunal as an informed and expert body on all the facts of the case. [30] As a Full Court observed in McDonald v Canterbury District Law Society (High Court, Wellington, M 215/87, 10 August 1989, Eichelbaum CJ, Heron and Ellis JJ) at p 12: Even in the absence of dishonesty, striking-off will be appropriate where there has been a serious breach of a solicitor’s fundamental duties to his client. [31] It is important to bear in mind t...

10. J v Khetarpal [2016] NZIACDT 7 (22 January 2016) [pdf, 243 KB]

    ...difficult exercise of judgment, to be made by the tribunal as an informed and expert body on all the facts of the case. [30] As a Full Court observed in McDonald v Canterbury District Law Society (High Court, Wellington, M 215/87, 10 August 1989, Eichelbaum CJ, Heron and Ellis JJ) at p 12: Even in the absence of dishonesty, striking-off will be appropriate where there has been a serious breach of a solicitor’s fundamental duties to his client. 9 [31] It is important to...