Search Results

1. LCRO 138/2018 CE and AB v UE (8 August 2018) [pdf, 159 KB]

   ...application for review. The question is whether they lodged it out of time. Timeline [4] The Committee’s decision is dated 11 June 2018. 2 [5] On 12 June 2018, the New Zealand Law Society Lawyers Complaints Service (Complaints Service) emailed a copy of the decision to Mr CE and Ms AB at the email addresses that they had provided to the Complaints Service. [6] A paper copy was also mailed to the lawyers on 12 June 2018, to the physical address that had been provided. [7]...

2. List of restorative justice providers

   Safer Mid Canterbury Court: Ashburton, Timaru, and Oamaru District Courts Referral types: Standard restorative justice, family violence Phone: 03 308 1395 Emails: rj.ashburton@safer.org.nz / rj.timaru@safer.org.nz / rj.oamaru@safer.org.nz Website: Safer Mid Canterbury   Auckland Restorative Justice Trust Courts: North Shore, Manukau, and Auckland District Courts Referral types: Standard restorative justice, family violence Phone: 027 601 4361 Email: admin@aucklandrj.org.nz Websit...

   Located in:

   1. About >
   2. Lawyers & service providers >
   3. Service providers >
   4. Restorative justice providers

3. CL v SC LCRO 218/2015 (6 April 2016) [pdf, 44 KB]

   ...investigation that arose from Mr CL’s response to a complaint made against him. [3] The determination issued on 28 August 2015, was promptly recalled, following the discovery of a minor error in the determination. The determination was reissued by email on the same day, at 4.01 pm. [4] The Committee’s determination was dispatched by post to Mr CL directly, and to counsel who had represented him in the complaint proceedings, Mr NH. [5] Mr CL filed an application to review the...

4. Birkenhead v Holywell LCRO 05 / 2010 (18 August 2010) [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...responded to her requests for further instructions. [10] The Standards Committee determined that no further action was necessary or appropriate. The Committee referred to the communication difficulties surrounding letters, telephone calls and emails, and the disputed evidence. It‟s decision was largely based on a perception that it could not resolve what it found to be the “diametrically opposed views on the sending and receipt of correspondence”. The Committee also con...

5. Morris v Accident Compensation Corporation (Interpretation of decision) [2024] NZACC 089 [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...for prescription medication costs, along with receipts and a table outlining the reimbursements requested. The total reimbursement request was for $465. The Corporation paid for only some of these costs. [4] On 23 September 2022, Mr Varney emailed Ms Bhavika Kiri, Ms Morris’s Recovery Coordinator, querying why all the requested amounts had not been paid, and provided a detailed breakdown of the amounts outstanding. [5] On 11 and 16 November 2022, Mr Varney emailed Ms Bhavi...

6. Joint Application to Make a New Parenting Order by Consent [pdf, 603 KB]

   ...Order by ConsentV1 July 2019 A P P LI C A TI O NPart 7 - Who is involved Applicant 1 Full name Date of birth D D M M Y Y Y Y  Age   Gender  Service address Home address Work address Phone number Country where you usually live  Email address (Please fill in your email address to give your consent to receive official Court correspondence by email): Ethnicity (optional) Occupation  Full-time  Part-time  Casual  Not applicable Emplo...

7. LCRO 173/2014 G NP and H NP v DC (27 September 2018) [pdf, 289 KB]

   ...Ms DC misled the court as to her knowledge of the existence of R’s father. (f) Ms DC intentionally provoked R’s father by refusing to send him affidavits she had filed, untruthfully denied the existence of documents and sending a mischievous email to him. [29] These issues had been distilled by the Complaints Service from several emails forwarded to it by the NPs, which included documents, correspondence in the COCA proceedings and some relevant court Minutes and decisions. [3...

8. Auckland Standards Committee 4 v Schlooz [2021] NZLCDT 12 ( 14 April 2021) [pdf, 400 KB]

   ...denied that he was providing legal services and attempted to argue that he was acting in his personal capacity. [14] The disputes generated much correspondence between the complainant and the practitioner, but the subject of these charges are the email exchanges between 15 2 Bolton v Law Society [1994] All ER 486 at 496. 4 May 2019 and 17 November 2019 in relation to Charge 1, and those from 1 February 2019 to 10 September 2019, in relation to Charge 3 (which deals with w...

9. C v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 414) & Complainant A [2018] NZREADT 20 [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...would not be a nuisance, he is old. I believe he would be acceptable”. She asked the licensee to “clear my old dog with the body corporate”. [5] The licensee communicated with the body corporate chairman and the complainant by email. These emails are central to the committee’s findings and the licensee’s appeal, as in forwarding an email from the chairman to the complainant, the licensee omitted two paragraphs. They will be set out later in this decision. [6] In an...

10. Rabson v Solicitor-General (Strike-Out Application) [2018] NZHRRT 37 [pdf, 312 KB]

    ...person Ms V McCall for defendant DATE OF HEARING: DATE OF DECISION: Heard on the papers 29 August 2018 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL STRIKING OUT STATEMENT OF CLAIM1 Introduction [1] On 3 September 2014 a Crown Counsel employed at Crown Law sent an email to a third party about Mr Rabson. Mr Rabson says the contents of the email are defamatory. The Solicitor-General asserts the email is the subject of legal professional privilege. Nevertheless, Mr Rabson is in possession of a version of...