Search Results

1. Guest v New Zealand Law Society [2010] NZLCDT 16 [pdf, 69 KB]

   ...received this amount from a client in cash at a Court hearing and he had kept this sum for himself, justifying this action on the basis that he was not being properly recompensed for his work and expenses. The Appellant then swore and filed an Affidavit in which this matter was addressed and at all times then and afterwards the Appellant accepted that he had acted very wrongly in taking the sum of $100.00. In our Decision of 6 October 2009 we dealt with this issue in t...

2. Harris v Harris - Mangamuka West 3B2A and East H5B (2001) 28 Auckland MB 167 (28 AT 167) [pdf, 5 MB]

   ...--=-" r-·· '=·~·· ·· .. ~ ·O'-~:"'" ·-:-:-- I Minute Book: 28 AT 167· 118 to 31 Man;h 1998. As you will see, the last payment made by the Hams Bros. was received on 6 April 1989 aHhough wa did receive grazing fees from the firm of P leigh, In March 1992. Currently the interest rate Is set at 12.5%, and this is charged at 31 March each year based on the outstanding monthly balance during the year. If no payments are made during the year, the inte...

3. [2020] NZEmpC 166 New Zealand Resident Doctors Assoc v Auckland District Health Board [pdf, 336 KB]

   ...“Employment Court of New Zealand Practice Directions” <www.employmentcourt.govt.nz> at No 16. endeavour to agree costs. If there is any disagreement as to the calculation of costs to be paid by the NZRDA, the defendants may file and serve a memorandum within 21 days of the date of this judgment. NZRDA then is to file and serve its memorandum in response within a further 21 days with any reply from the defendants to be filed and served within 7 days thereafter....

4. [2022] NZEnvC 167 MTP Limited v Westland District Council [pdf, 324 KB]

   ...have found them to be of limited assistance to the facts of this case. The facts [14] The court was presented with extensive evidence, much of which the parties agree is not relevant to any matter in issue.11 We do not essay the evidence filed, but simply note the relevant facts, most of which are agreed. [15] We do so by responding to the questions posed by the High Court in Goldfinch next. The nature of the activity authorised by the consents [16] The subdivision consent...

5. LCRO 170/2020 KLM Limited v ND (30 March 2021) [pdf, 276 KB]

   ...threatening letters”, Mr ND, in his 29 September letter to Mr OE had explained that [ABJ]’s objection to [Mr [OE]] acting as mediator was not intended as “a threat or threats”. Application for review [20] In its application for review filed on 31 August 2020, [KLM] says it “fail[s] to accept that one has the right to threaten any individual”, and from the commencement of the lease, [KLM] had been subjected by [ABJ] to “th[at] type of behaviour”, namely, “threats,...

6. Swanson - Waotu South C No 6B (2014) 110 Waiariki MB 187 (110 WAR 187) [pdf, 235 KB]

   ...This decision concerns an application pursuant to ss 135 and 136 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 (“the Act”) to change the status of the Māori freehold land known as Waotu South C No 6B (“the block”) to general land. The application was filed by June Swanson and Zena Lowther (“the applicants”) on 23 January 2014 alongside an application to terminate the ahu whenua trust over the block. [2] Both applications were initially heard before Judge Savage on 4 April 2014. In...

7. CAC 10020 v McDonald [2013] NZREADT 89 [pdf, 57 KB]

   ...have wide powers to admit evidence we now refer to salient parts of those briefs but, of course, the weight to be attached to evidence is determined by our views on credibility. [19] We note that the reason there has been such a delay between the filing of the defence briefs of evidence and the hearing in Ashburton on 2 October 2013 is that the original hearing of this prosecution was interrupted by the second substantial Canterbury earthquake. Also, for various reasons, it has proved...

8. Doran v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 413) and Fleming [2018] NZREADT 42 [pdf, 272 KB]

   ...The Committee also did not accept submissions on behalf of Mr Fleming that no penalty orders should be made. [28] Paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2 of the Committee’s C17489 decision set out the right of appeal to the Tribunal. Mr and Mrs Doran did not file an appeal to the Tribunal. Pursuant to s 111 (1) of the Act, the time within which they could do so expired on 19 October 2017. Complaint C22810 [29] On 5 October 2017 Mrs Doran made a further complaint against Mr Fleming (“Compla...

9. CAC 409 v Brady [2019] NZREADT 21 (23 May 2019) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...salesperson, previously engaged as a salesperson at Harveys) with misconduct under s 73(b) of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008. The charges were set down for hearing in Auckland for five days, from 1 April 2019. [2] In his opening submissions filed on 20 March 2019, counsel for the Committee, Mr Simpson, sought leave to amend the charges by withdrawing the particulars of the charge against Mr Ball. The Tribunal has given leave for the particulars against Mr Ball to be withdrawn...

10. [2021] NZREADT 43 - Complaints Assessment Committee v Lowndes (10 August 2021) [pdf, 302 KB]

    ...investigator’s letter. e) Please have [Ms Lowndes] explain how she justifies the very significant increase in price from [Mr Drinnan and his father] to [Mr Yang]. In addition please also provide the following documents: 1. Full agency file for the Property. 2. All email and text correspondence between [Ms Lowndes] and [the Vendor]. 3. All email and text correspondence between [Ms Lowndes] and [Mr Drinnan and his father]. 4. All email and text correspondence between [...