Search Results

1. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee 1 v Williams [2019] NZLCDT 33 [pdf, 317 KB]

   ...obligation to the trust, no obligation to her, notwithstanding the previous relationship, that's your position? A. That's my position. [16] Counsel for Mr Williams relied on the view expressed by Matthew Charles Hay who swore and filed an affidavit in support of Mr Williams. Mr Hay is an expert practitioner in the area of trust law. He expressed the opinion that the payment was a trustee task and that Mr Williams was not acting as a lawyer. The conduct referred to...

2. Wikiriwhi v Walters - Oruanui 9 Block and Part Oruanui 10 Block, Lot 1 Deposited Plan 471989 and Lot 2 Deposited Plan 471989 (2020) 232 Waiariki MB 212 (232 WAR 212) [pdf, 382 KB]

   ...at the conclusion of which I issued timetabling directions.16 [18] A memorandum of counsel was filed by the respondents on 4 September 2018, indicating they no longer opposed discovery. I issued directions granting an extension of time for filing statements of response. A joint memorandum of counsel was then filed on 11 February 2019 and the matter was set for hearing in August 2019. [19] The final hearings were held on 13 August 2019 and 14 August 2019.17 At the conclusion...

3. [2022] NZREADT 15 – Complaints Assessment Committee 2108 v Rankin Tremain Real Estate Wairarapa Ltd (10 August 2022) [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...(the Committee) with misconduct under s 73(a) of the Act (disgraceful conduct). It is alleged that in completing agency (listing) agreements in respect of six sales, Mr Rankin forged the signatures and initials of the vendors. [3] Mr Rankin filed an amended Response to Charge on 23 February 2022 admitting the charge. [4] Tremain Real Estate Wairarapa Ltd (Tremain Real Estate or the agency), the second defendant, was the agency which engaged Mr Rankin. It is a licensed compan...

4. Slade - Parengarenga 3G (2014) 87 Taitokerau MB 46 (87 TTK 46) [pdf, 121 KB]

   ...told me on that occasion is entirely at odds 87 Taitokerau MB 54 with the state of the Kiwibank accounts as at January 2013. Furthermore, I expressly pointed out to Mr Henare that the trustees were not entitled to pay themselves meeting fees (as the trust order did not provide for that) yet the Kiwibank bank statements disclose that the trustees persisted in making payments following that hearing. Mr Henare’s conduct suggests to me a real risk that whatever of the Trust�...

5. [2011] NZREADT 6 Eden v CAC 10059 & Seddon Real Esate Limited [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...of the Act. [12] He submitted further that s 122 were clearly applicable as he (Mr Eden) was a party to the transaction referred to under s 122. [13] Mr Bean, on behalf of Seddon Real Estate, took no part in the action. However, he had filed a reply to Mr Eden’s evidence and submissions. He submitted that s 122 of the Act dealt solely with a “treatment of monies in trust accounts” and was not relevant to the dispute. He said that a nil balance was recorded for Seddon R...

6. Jacobsen v Zhou [2015] NZHRRT 38 [pdf, 71 KB]

   ...believed to exist in terms of s 21(1)(h) and (2)(b) of the Act and if so, whether Mr Zhou has established on the balance of probabilities, that s 21B(1) excepts any conduct which would otherwise be unlawful. Both parties have been given an opportunity to file post- hearing submissions on these issues. See the Minute issued by the Chairperson on 26 August 2015. Mr Zhou responded on 31 August 2015 and Mr Jacobsen replied on 1 September 2015. These new submissions have been taken into acco...

7. 2018 NZSSAA 001 (9 January 2018) [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...placed on it, and the extent of relief available to the appellant following those findings. [4] The question is now before the Authority pursuant to the consent order of the High Court dated 5 May 2016. That order followed a joint memorandum filed by the parties, and the joint memorandum is referred to in the order. This order of the High Court formulated the issues for the Authority in the following way: 46.2 The matter is remitted to the Authority under High Court Rule 21.14(b)...

8. AT v RN LCRO 47/2015 (29 September 2016) [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...language, it could find nothing in the words and language used which, judged objectively, could lead to a conclusion that its motivation was to inspire anxiety or that Mr [RN] had breached a duty owed to Mr [AT]. Application for review [14] Mr [AT] filed an application for review on 19 March 2015. In summary, the grounds for review were that: (a) Mr [RN] ought not to have written to Mr [AT] at his home address. (b) [Law Firm A] had confirmed in correspondence that they were act...

9. Holmqvist v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 403) & Coma [2017] NZREADT 15 [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...back to the Committee for it to undertake an inquiry Outcome [47] The appeal is dismissed [48] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Act, which sets out appeal rights. Any appeal must be filed in the High Court within 20 working days of the date on which the Tribunal’s decision is served. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. ____________________ Hon P J Andrews Chair...

10. LCRO 59/2016 and 61/2016 DE and QV v Standards Committee (27 September 2018) [pdf, 175 KB]

    ...took steps to remove the tenant and secure the property as well as re-securing it when the tenant returned. (vi) By the date of the mortgagee sale the firm had expended $45,000 in costs for the independent solicitor and real estate agent’s fees without any expectation of recovering those costs. (vii) The mortgagee sale resulted in all funds being recovered by contributors. [53] Mr TG also made mention of the fact that he considered all three lawyers were entitled to a consid...