Search Results

1. LCRO 176/2022 SP v AQ (15 August 2023) [pdf, 313 KB]

   ...the requirements of r 3 of the Conduct and Client Care Rules,5 particularly r 3.1, which provides: A lawyer must at all times treat a client with respect and courtesy and must not act in a discriminatory manner in contravention of section 21 of the Human Rights Act 1993. [26] With regard to Ms AQ’s complaint that Ms SP had breached her privacy, Ms SP notes that Ms AQ was happy for Ms VR to remain in the room when signing her Will. [27] Ms SP concludes her response in the followi...

2. [2023] NZIACDT 25 – ED v Dai - Sanctions (25 September 2023) [pdf, 136 KB]

   ...implausible. Mr Dai’s continuing excuses and shifting of blame to everyone except himself must lead to the maximum allowed penalties. [21] Mr Dai’s unlawful and unlicensed advice resulted in significant financial losses for them, as well as the human toll of enormous stress and anxiety. The complainant and her husband seek $21,633 in compensation: Service fee $6,900 Application fees $600 Tour fee $798 Tuition fees $4,760 Student insurance $175 Medical fees fo...

3. [2025] NZREADT 06 - UX v REAA (19 February 2025) [pdf, 292 KB]

   ...identifying the correspondents and the dates of each communication are present for some). NG’s memorandum (BoD redacted at 024–028) and the contemporary emails which were attached to that email (BoD redacted at 037–043). 12 Alpine Energy Ltd v Human Rights Review Tribunal [2014] NZHC 2792 at [29] and [31]. 13 16 November 2023 (at 5.14 pm). To the extent that the information might therefore be regarded as of some probative value, it is contrary to the complainant’s co...

4. [2024] NZEmpC 181 Ford v Henry Brown and Co Ltd [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...was, and, when they advised that they were ringing about Mr Ford, they were told that he had been fired and that they (Mr Brown and Ms Muir) would be better off without him. [13] The company responded to Mr Ford’s personal grievances through a human resources consultant on 20 September 2022. The same day, the company wrote to Mr Ford advising that it had concerns that he had misrepresented himself to it when applying for the role and was in breach of cl 16, having not advised,...

5. Auckland Standards Committee v Davidson [2012] NZLCDT 35 [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...relationship of intimate collaboration with the judges, as well as with his fellow-members of the Bar, in the high task of endeavouring to make successful the service of the law to the community ... Yet it cannot be that every proof which he may give of human frailty so disqualifies him. The ends which he has to serve are lofty indeed, but it is with men and not with paragons that he is required to pursue them. It is not difficult to see in some forms of conduct, or in convictions of s...

6. Auckland Standards Committee v ABC [2012] NZLCDT 14 [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...over 30 years, and did not reflect a series of such events; there was no matter arising which resulted in a complaint by or loss to the bank concerned; and there was no deliberate or wilful disregard by the practitioner of her obligations, but a human error made by a usually competent member of the profession. [23] It was also submitted that in assessing penalty the Tribunal could take into account mitigating factors such as the practitioner taking immediate steps to put in pla...

7. Otago Standards Committee v Rayner [2014] NZLCDT 62 [pdf, 87 KB]

   ...professional role, he could not divorce himself from being M’s barrister having just visited M in that capacity. That opened his actions up to the very type of allegations that eventuated. On the other hand we believe that it was an understandable human reaction, given the circumstances that the practitioner found his long-standing, respected client in, to carry out a simple, lawful request in the nature of a kindness. [58] The Tribunal finds that the practitioner did not breach r...

8. McCreery v Accident Compensation Corporation (Claim for cover and entitlements) [2025] NZACC 191 [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...which the person has cover. Section 25(1)(a)(i) provides that “accident” means a specific event or a series of events, other than a gradual process, that involves the application of a force (including gravity), or resistance, external to the human body. Section 25(3) notes that the fact that a person has suffered a personal injury is not of itself to be construed as an indication or presumption that it was caused by an accident. [27] Section 67 provides that an applicant who...

9. Waitangi Tribunal - Report on the Māori Community Development Act Claim [pdf, 3.2 MB]

   W h a i a t e M a n a M o t u h a k e i n P u r s u i t o f M a n a M o t u h a k e Downloaded from www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz Downloaded from www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz Downloaded from www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz Downloaded from www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz Downloaded from www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz Downloaded from www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz W A I T A N G I T R I B U N A L R E P O R T 2 0 1 4 W a i 2 4

10. [2015] NZEmpC 28 Stevens v Hapag-Lloyd (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 307 KB]

    ...plaintiff’s submissions rested on a contention that cl 7(b) was harsh and oppressive and could not be relied on by the company. The argument was said to be bolstered by a number of international instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Forced Labour Convention. It was submitted that HL Ltd was obliged to comply with these instruments, via its Code of Ethics, and that it had failed...