Search Results

1. RA v LZ LCRO 2 / 2011 (22 August 2012) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...BETWEEN RA and RB of Christchurch Applicant AND LZ of Rangiora Respondent DECISION Background [1] The full background to this matter is set out in the Standards Committee decision, and covers in detail the matters comprising the complaint made by Mr RA against Mr LZ (the Practitioner). It is a thorough and well-written decision and runs to some 15 pages. The following is a brief overview to provide a backdrop of the complaints and the discuss...

2. Ryan v CAC 20002 & Skinner [2013] NZREADT 45 [pdf, 67 KB]

   BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2013] NZREADT 45 READT 040/12 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under s.111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN LEE RYAN Appellant AND THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 20002) First respondent AND FRASER SKINNER Second respondent MEMBERS OF TRIBUNAL Judge P F Barber - Chairperson Ms N Dangen - Member Mr J Gaukrodger - Member HEARD at QUEENSTOWN on 19 February 2013 (with subse...

3. [2018] NZEnvC 108 Dromgool v Minister for Land Information [pdf, 4.7 MB]

   ...the land of the objector to be taken: (e) prepare a written report on the objection and on the court's findings: (f) submit its report and findings to the Minister or local authority, as the case may require. [6] In order to understand the matters before this Court, it is necessary to traverse both the factual background and, subsequently, the background to this appeal process. Factual Background [7] In 2012 TEL acquired the 11 OV transmission line between Kaikohe and Kaitaia,...

4. [2009] NZEmpC AC 19/09 Gilbert v The Attorney-General in respect of the CE of Department of Corrections [pdf, 59 KB]

   ...the Court recall its judgment (or part of it) on remedies and costs delivered on 4 December 2003 (AC 63/03) because of a slip or omission. That application was determined by a judgment issued on 10 March 2006 ([2006] ERNZ 1). In respect of some matters I found there was neither slip nor omission, but on others I accepted that the interests of justice required not only that the judgment be recalled in part but that there could be further actuarial evidence and submissions on those is...

5. Reid v CAC 20002 & Cox and Cox v CAC 20002 & Reid [2013] NZREADT 68 [pdf, 61 KB]

   BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2013] NZREADT 68 READT 073/12 and 082/12 IN THE MATTER OF two appeals under s.111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN JOHN REID (073/12) Appellant AND REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC20002 ) First respondent AND DANIEL COX Second respondent BETWEEN DANIEL COX (082/12) Appellant AND REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 20002) First respondent AND JOHN REID Secon...

6. [2016] NZEmpC 86 Radius Residential Care Ltd v The NZ Nurses Organisation Inc [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...the union now called E Tu Inc (E Tu) formed picket lines outside workplaces and the company’s head office during their working hours. They did so after their unions told Radius that they would then be engaged in paid stop-work meetings about matters of union business and, inferentially at least, collective bargaining that was then going on. [6] Paid stop-work meetings of limited duration are permitted under both the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act) 1 and the rel...

7. EA v NR LCRO 130/2015 (31 October 2016) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...available under the Act. Mrs EA’s lawyer’s fees totalled $5,321.20 at the time of her application for review. She considers Ms NR should also pay those, and “whatever subsequent costs” Mrs EA incurs, “prior to finalisation of these matters”. Mrs EA also wishes to be consulted on the details that would be disclosed if this decision were to be published. [27] Mrs EA said she did not consider $5,000 was sufficient to adequately compensate her and her husband for the br...

8. LCRO 75/2022 BG v HC (25 October 2022) [pdf, 212 KB]

   ...did so on 9 July 2022. [22] HC’s response was comprehensive. A significant component of her response provided background to the circumstances which had culminated in the employment dispute. [23] To the extent that HC’s reply addressed matters specifically relating to the Standards Committee decision and the review application filed, HC submitted that: (a) on first seeking advice from BG, she had been assured by BG that she had strong prospect of a satisfactory outcome; and...

9. LCRO 6/2025 EI v NT (30 April 2025) [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...6.1 of the Rules. (c) NT is a senior lawyer and has brought the legal profession into disrepute by failing to adhere to fundamental principles. (d) Although NT has corrected her “administrative practices” this only arise because EI drew the matter to her attention. (e) NT has never apologised nor has she reimbursed EI for legal fees. Response [30] In her letter to the Case Manager dated 25 March 2025, NT said the following: (a) The Committee’s decision was correct. (b) Her...

10. LCRO 20/2020 WD and FJ v EG, SN and PL (7 April 2022) [pdf, 354 KB]

    ...conveyancing transaction were followed, and how subsequent concerns about the management of that transaction were dealt with. [5] That brief description is not to be taken as trivialising the complaint and review application. I acknowledge that the matters raised by the complainants have been a source of real distress to them which continues to this day, some four to five years after the events themselves. [6] That being said, I also acknowledge that, for the practitioners, the dis...