Search Results

1. SW on behalf of COMPANY 1 v RG, OL and HJ LCRO 130/2014 (3 November 2016) [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...being informed that the vessel had been moved, advised his clients that his initial estimate had to be significantly amended to meet the cost of a litigation response which had not been within the contemplation of the parties. Mr SW confirmed in email correspondence, that an account rendered for costs incurred in seeking injunctive relief, would be paid. [55] Argument that the fees charged were not reasonable focuses on submission that the conveyancing services were incompetently perfo...

2. July 2016 outstanding applications [pdf, 255 KB]

   ...contact the Office of the Chief Registrar in Wellington, quoting the appropriate application number at: Physical address: Postal address: L17, 141 The Terrace DX Box SX11203 WELLINGTON WELLINGTON Phone: 04 914 3102 Fax: 04 914 3100 Email: mlcnationaloffice@justice.govt.nz J M TANGAERE Chief Registrar 15 June 2016 Outstanding Applications in the Office of the Chief Registrar. APPLICATION NO: SECTION: APPLICANT:...

3. August 2016 outstanding applications [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...contact the Office of the Chief Registrar in Wellington, quoting the appropriate application number at: Physical address: Postal address: L17, 141 The Terrace DX Box SX11203 WELLINGTON WELLINGTON Phone: 04 914 3102 Fax: 04 914 3100 Email: mlcnationaloffice@justice.govt.nz J M TANGAERE Chief Registrar 15 July 2016 Outstanding Applications in the Office of the Chief Registrar. APPLICATION NO: SECTION: APPLICANT:...

4. [2016] NZEmpC 173 Lyttelton Port Company Ltd v Maritime Union of NZ Inc [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...dated 12 December 2016, lawyers acting for LPC wrote to MUNZ referring to various alleged defects in the notice, including the absence of a list of the MUNZ members who would strike. [13] Later that day, lawyers acting for MUNZ responded, also by email, attaching what was described as “a list of members belonging to the Maritime Union of New Zealand 2012, Lyttelton Branch, Local 43”. [14] On the same day, the present proceeding was issued. [15] On 14 December 2016, the Uni...

5. Complaints Assessment Committee (CAC 403) v Licensee B [2017] NZREADT 1 [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...the agency where Mr Brankin was manager) was dishonest in her dealings with him and clients when that could not be substantiated, had restricted her hours of work when she was a “top-line salesperson”, and had improperly accessed her private emails. The Tribunal found that the manner in which Mr Brankin treated the complainant was harassment and found that his conduct was disgraceful, under s 73(a) of the Act. 18 Complaints A...

6. LCRO 152/2017 CS v GB (22 May 2018) [pdf, 248 KB]

   ...standards and sensibilities. [99] An illustration of the application of the rule where an adverse finding was made against the lawyer concerned was where the lawyer, also an executor and a co-trustee, acting on an estate administration had sent emails to the client which were discourteous, and unprofessional.28 (b) Discussion [100] Ms TC claims that Mr GB spoke to her and Mr CS during the meeting on 23 March 2017 in “a very abrupt, heated way”. She says Mr GB did not treat Mr...

7. [2013] NZEmpC 235 Young v Bay Of Plenty DHB [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...protected disclosure of 16 May 2008 have been fully investigated and any necessary action taken and you have been advised of this. The matter is therefore considered closed by the DHB. [40] Mr Young responded promptly to the CEO’s letter by email later on 14 August 2008. He disputed the CEO’s finding that the matters of his protected disclosures had been concluded. He invoked the Board’s policies and advised that having contacted the Office of the Ombudsman, it confirmed...

8. Complaints Assessment Committee (CAC 408) v Nicholas Schembri, Joseph Lupi & Timothy Kearins [2017] NZREADT 24 [pdf, 311 KB]

   ...Schembri that he needed to explain this carefully to her, including the fact that it was her responsibility to manage the tenants out, and that the purchaser required vacant possession. [18] Once the agreement was signed and after seeing some emails between the tenants and Ms C Mr Lupi told Mr Schembri it would be best for him to step aside and he took over the negotiation with the tenants. He told the Tribunal that he tried to assist the tenants to find another apartment but was...

9. [2018] NZEmpC 4 Ioan v Scott Technology NZ Ltd t/a Rocklabs [pdf, 340 KB]

   ...manager to change his mind. He offered to work for free for the first few weeks just to prove the engineering manager’s concern about Mr Ioan not getting along with other people was unsubstantiated. Mr Ioan followed that conversation up with an email in which he advised that he was “more than happy to start on a 90 days trial, and if by any chance (that one in a million I was telling you on the phone), things won’t work the way they were supposed to, you could terminate the...

10. E87 Fiona Knox – Corporate – RE – Applicant [pdf, 1.1 MB]

    ...Auckland Council committed funding to ensure that fit for purpose infrastructure could be provided to ensure safe berthage and access. Panuku also committed to land side space to accommodate ancillary activities. 3.10 There were a series of email exchanges between myself and Mr Ingram and a number of phone calls. I arranged for meetings and site visits with Keith Ingram and Panuku representatives, our Marina Manager and our project manager. I also discussed with POAL representa...