Search Results

1. [2025] NZSSA 05 (3 February 2025) [pdf, 149 KB]

   ...family in several stages. Through [The appellant's husband]’s application, the family received: a. $1,600 on 20 December 2021 for a fridge and washing machine; b. $3,500 on 21 December 2021 for a bed, TV, vacuum, iron, and delivery fee; Total: $5,100. 10. Six months later, on 17 June 2022, [the Appellant’s husband], on XXXX’s behalf, sought assistance under the Re-establishment Grant to purchase a laptop. This was declined by the Ministry on the basis that a lap...

2. LCDT - 2015 annual report [pdf, 249 KB]

   ...the earliest possible date. This is reflected in the 58% reduction in “cases on hand”. Some administrative frustration occurs when events beyond the control of the Chair or Deputy Chair delay expeditious process. For example, the oldest live files relate to two lawyers who not only face disciplinary charges, but also charges in the criminal justice system. Because there is a risk of compromising the lawyers’ rights in the criminal trials to be held, the disciplinary process must...

3. WHT - Chair's directions for multi unit claims [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...multi unit complex is defined in section 8 of the Act as being a complex that contains two or more dwellinghouses and is a company-share complex, cross- lease complex, or unit title complex. 1.3 Unit owners within a multi-unit complex can only file a claim with the Tribunal as part of a multi-unit complex claim unless:  Their unit is the only unit in the complex that leaks, or  They have an eligible claim under the 2002 Act and have not withdrawn their claim to be part of...

4. WHT Claims for a multi unit - Chair's Directions [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...multi unit complex is defined in section 8 of the Act as being a complex that contains two or more dwellinghouses and is a company-share complex, cross- lease complex, or unit title complex. 1.3 Unit owners within a multi-unit complex can only file a claim with the Tribunal as part of a multi-unit complex claim unless:  Their unit is the only unit in the complex that leaks, or  They have an eligible claim under the 2002 Act and have not withdrawn their claim to be part of...

5. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v PL [2016] NZLCDT 12 [pdf, 59 KB]

   ...not ignore the possibility that the transaction may have proceeded to completion. (i) The respondent has an unblemished record having been in practise in excess of 30 years and is held in high regard by his community attested to by affidavits filed in his support. [18] The Tribunal accepts these mitigatory factors except to acknowledge the receipt of evidence from the applicant, referable to penalty, as to the respondent 7 having a finding of unsatisfactory conduct in May 20...

6. Auckland Standards Committee v Eteuati [2009] NZLCDT 17 [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...Following the practitioner’s initial meeting with the complainant she failed or refused to meet with her client on request or otherwise communicate with her or her representatives concerning the appeal. She failed or refused to hand over the file in respect of the appeal on request as a result of which the complainant has suffered a loss of important records concerning her medical history. [3] The conduct of the practitioner exposed the complainant in the submission of the Soci...

7. Zhai v The Real Estate Agents Authority [2018] NZREADT 33 [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...2017 CE, and that he was not eligible to apply for a new licence for a period of five years after the cancellation. [12] Mr Zhai was also advised of his right to apply for review of the Registrar’s decision, under s 112 of the Act. Mr Zhai filed an application to review the Registrar’s decision on 20 March 2018. Submissions [13] Mr Zhai said in his application for review: I am writing to you to explain the reasons for not completing the 2017 calendar year verifiable conti...

8. [2022] NZEmpC 88 ABC v DEF [pdf, 234 KB]

   ...Appeal did not consider that there was a seriously arguable question of law, that was a finding made for the purposes of an appeal to that Court and was not therefore a relevant consideration. [17] ABC also pointed out that she had received a “fee waiver at the Court of Appeal on the grounds of public interest”. [18] She also said the Court of Appeal had considered there should be no award of costs on either application; however, as mentioned earlier, DEF had not sought costs,...

9. [2025] NZIACDT 49 - CE v Asici (22 September 2025) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...complaint is accepted. Ms Asici has learned from the mistake. It is acknowledged their practices had fallen short of the standard. Oral explanations of the agreement are now given. They agree that a client should sign off an application prior to filing. They continue to look for ways to improve their processes. They hold regular CPD sessions on rulings of the Tribunal, best practice and the Authority’s requirements. Ms Asici also regularly attends webinars of the Authori...

10. KX v Accident Compensation Corporation (Entitlement to Loss of Potential Earnings) [2025] NZACC 108 [pdf, 253 KB]

    ...$140,759.41. [19] The appellant applied for a review of that decision on 25 October 2023. [20] The review proceeded on 13 March 2024. The Reviewer issued a review decision on 15 March 2024, dismissing the review application. A Notice of Appeal was filed against the Reviewer's decision on 18 March 2024. This appeal was 5 subsequently withdrawn on the basis the Corporation agreed although the appellant was enrolled in full time study for certain periods, records showed he...