Search Results

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

   ...decision reviewed. There were a number of reasons why he sought the review, one of the principal reasons being that the Standards Committee had not, in his view, provided reasons for declining to uphold his complaint. From my early assessment of the file, I agreed that the Standards Committee decision was not explained by any clear statement of reasons and the 2 Standards Committee was requested, pursuant to Section 204(a)(ii) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act to provide...

2. [2025] NZIACDT 51 - NO v Ellis (2 October 2025) [pdf, 257 KB]

   ...It was fulltime for one year, from 27 February until 1 December 2023. [13] The complainant sent an email to Mr Ellis on 10 January 2023 stating he thought the client had sufficient funds for a course of one year. He requested the application be filed as soon as possible. [14] There are notes by Mr Ellis on his client file recording his work and certain communications with the client and complainant relevant to the complaint (verbatim):1 9/12 finance documents sent by [client] ...

3. [2017] NZEmpC 23 Domingo v Suon and Heng (t-a Town and Country Food) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...requiring the defendant to comply with the terms of its earlier determination within a period of a calendar month. The Authority coupled its compliance order with an order that the defendant pay interest on the outstanding amounts, together with the filing fee on the plaintiff’s application for a compliance order. [6] The defendant failed to take any steps to comply with the Authority’s compliance order. Nor did the defendant take any steps to challenge the Authority’s c...

4. Keegan v CAC 10062 & Peacocke & Stanaway Real Estate [2012] NZREADT 35 [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...following orders: 1. It stays appeal numbers 009/12, 010/12 and 011/12 until further order of this Tribunal. 2. It sets a conference date to review progress with the High Court proceedings at 10:30 am on Friday, 2 November 2012. [15] Counsel may file a joint memorandum setting out progress with the High Court and what further orders are sought from this Tribunal prior to that conference. [16] The Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to the appeal provisions contained in s 113 of...

5. CAC 10044 v He [2011] NZREADT 9 [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...knowing he did not have authorisation to do so. Background [3] The defendant is a licensed real estate salesperson who at the material time was employed by Queen Street Realty Limited in Auckland. [4] On 20 December 2010 the defendant filed a response to the charge in which he admitted both of the two charges referred to above. [5] As a consequence of the defendant’s admission to both charges they were adjourned for a hearing by way of formal proof on 3 May 2011. [6]...

6. Slade - Parengarenga 3G (2014) 84 Taitokerau MB 134 (84 TTK 134) [pdf, 2.6 MB]

   ...idea what is the current financial situation of the trust. [12] The most concerning aspect of the current situation is that P F Olsen has not been paid since before June last year. It is now owed $93,854.40 by the trust. This includes management fees, payments to contractors, insurance premiums and penalty interest. Of particular concern, the trust's forest insurance and public liability insurance lapsed on 31 July 2014 because the Trust had not paid its premiums. [13] This i...

7. Davis v ACC [2012] NZACA 1 [pdf, 173 KB]

   ..." ... any wages, salary, allowances (including allowances of any of the kinds referred to in section 72 of the Income Tax Act 1976) holiday pay, overtime pay, long service leave pay, bonuses, gratuities, extra salary commissions, directors' fees, honoraria, emoluments or remuneration of any kind paid or payable." [26] In the case of this appellant's situation the majority of the sum is the identification of a payment of a very low interest rate that he was being charg...

8. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee 3 v Sullivan [2016] NZLCDT 13 [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...repaid by the statutory manager and the estates have been repaid almost all of their investments. [9] The respondent has previously been found guilty of professional misconduct. In 2009 he was found to have deliberately authorised the taking of fees contrary to specific directions from the client. He was censured, fined, ordered to pay compensation, and costs. In 2013 he was found guilty of unsatisfactory conduct for failing to comply with the rules relating to the signing of aut...

9. [2021] NZEmpC 44 Wills v Farmlands Co-Operative Society Ltd [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...4.5 days x $2,390 but erroneously calculated the amount as $10,775. The figure in this decision corrects that error. (e) Farmlands’ claim for costs includes attendances in the Authority which was unfair. The Authority had closed its file in the absence of a costs application by Farmlands. (f) Ms Wills has limited financial means so costs should lie where they fall. (g) In the alternative, Ms Wills’ limited financial means should have the effect of reducing costs to...

10. Strengthening the family justice system - Q and A [pdf, 330 KB]

    ...where a party has acted unreasonably or unnecessarily drawn out proceedings (perhaps by refusing to attend FDR), the court can make a CCO against that person (this is separate from court costs ordered between the parties in proceedings). • Filing fees not be changed. Role of professionals • Changing the role of lawyer for the child to represent both a child’s welfare and best interests and views • New criteria be introduced for the appointment of lawyer f...