Search Results

1. CM v XH LCRO 97 / 2010 (5 July 2011) [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...property matters to be dealt with. All matters were eventually settled, making it unnecessary for any proceeding to be filed. Substantive complaints [11] There were two principal complaints made by the Applicant. The first concerned an email sent by the Practitioner to the Applicant, informing him of R‟s wish to separate and other related matters. This email was sent to the Applicant‟s email address at his work. The Applicant complained that the Practitioner ought to hav...

2. LCRO 22/2019 HT v MK (29 May 2020) [pdf, 326 KB]

   ...BEG’s shares in DOT. 1 The firm acted on matters including a claim against a former employee of DOT, Mr JS, referred to later in this decision. 2 [4] On 10 March 2016, Mr MK reminded (by email) Mr HT that DOT owed $39,538.74 to the firm for outstanding fees.2 Six weeks later on 28 April 2016, in response to Mr MK’s follow up email, Mr HT expressed (by email) his lack of “confidence” with the firm “over the outstandi...

3. LCRO 80/2021 A LN and B LN v QG (9 November 2021) [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...dated 24 September 2020. In summary Ms QG submitted: (a) The hard drive failure concerned email data relating to a particular period. It did not affect electronically stored client files. However, paper files might not have included copies of emails exchanged. (b) Nevertheless, Mr LN should have copies of all emails he received from Ms QG. (c) When the retainer was terminated Ms QG asked Mr LN to provide copies of emails he had received, so that she could reconstruct her file....

4. RB v CG LCRO 117/2013 (30 June 2014) [pdf, 56 KB]

   ...with respect to their [child]’s care after they had separated and before they finalised the proceeding over [the] day to day care arrangements by consent, Ms RB and her former husband corresponded by email. In some cases, her former husband’s emails included comments that he later accepted 2 were a breach of the protection order1 [5] Ms RB’s complaint is that Ms CG did not advise her that she could use the protection orders to make the abusive emails stop. She says she...

5. M (C M Trust) v Tower Insurance Ltd [2019] CEIT-2019-0012 [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...that loss and damage has arisen from that wrongful refusal. The steps allegedly required are referred to as the “make safe” repairs. [12] The grounds for Tower’s decision to refuse to carry out the make safe repairs was set out in an email between Tower and Stream dated 4 April 2014. Tower took the view that the Applicants had been fully indemnified by the cash settlement received from EQC which was for an amount that exceeded Tower’s depreciated cost of repairs and so T...

6. Fletcher v CAC412 & Nops [2019] NZREADT 35 (21 August 2019) [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...there were multiple offers, he was required to obtain from the appellant a multiple offer form which she would be required to sign before he could proceed to submit any offer by her to the vendor. The second respondent duly prepared the form and he emailed it to appellant. Unfortunately, this form referred not to 40 Grant Road, Waipu but, incorrectly, to another property at 6B Moki Place, Ruakaka. The appellant told the Real Estate Authority facilitator on 17 August 2018 that she �...

7. [2024] NZREADT 30 - Bhatt v Registrar of the REAA (9 September 2024) [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...annual suspension fee). BACKGROUND [3] The Applicant held a salesperson licence under the Act. The Applicant voluntarily suspended his licence under s 58 of the Act on 19 April 2019. [4] On 8 March 2024, the Authority wrote to the Applicant by email to notify him that if he wished to keep his licence suspended, he was required to pay the annual suspension fee by 5 pm on 19 April 2024. The correspondence reminded the Applicant that the Registrar must cancel his licence if prescri...

8. [2021] NZEmpC 33 Saipe v Bethell [pdf, 238 KB]

   ...22 March 2021 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE J C HOLDEN [1] Mr Saipe started working for Bethells Beach Cottages (the Cottages) in November 2012 in the position of part-time assistant manager. He was dismissed by the defendant, Ms Bethell, by email dated 24 August 2013. Mr Saipe claims that his dismissal was unjustifiable. Preliminary issue – can Mr Saipe bring his grievance? [2] There is a preliminary issue as to whether Mr Saipe is able to bring his personal griev...

9. Marshall v IDEA Services Ltd (Privacy Act) [2020] NZHRRT 13 [pdf, 353 KB]

   ...on four occasions found medication down the side of Eamon’s wheelchair or in his clothing. This raised concerns that Eamon had not received the medication on those occasions. Those concerns (and others) were set out by Mr and Mrs Marshall in an email dated 8 December 2015 addressed to Kai Jugo of the Needs Assessment and Service Co-ordinator (NASC) service of the Hawkes Bay District Health Board. In that same email Mr and Mrs Marshall expressed their view that Eamon should be transit...

10. [2014] NZEmpC 154 Fox v Hereworth School Trust Board [pdf, 200 KB]

    ...community input into the discussion of educational and moral issues raised with the school by Mrs Fox and would preclude the involvement of “parents [who] would be crucial witnesses to support [the plaintiff’s] version of events”. [21] By email dated 29 October 2009 a workplace coordinator at the Napier office of the Department of Labour (ML) wrote to the plaintiff saying, among other things: We have been asked by Hereworth School to provide mediation assistance with regard...