Canterbury Westland Standards Committee v Tee [2013] NZLCDT 34 [pdf, 43 KB]
...the conduct itself, Mr Tee’s failure to engage in the disciplinary process, and his prior conduct, indicated strike-off was the appropriate penalty to ensure public protection. Submissions for Mr Tee [13] For Mr Tee, submissions had been filed in response to those filed and relied on by the Standards Committee. As noted, there was no appearance for Mr Tee at the penalty hearing, only the written submissions lodged on his behalf. [14] The Tribunal considered the submissio...