Search Results

1. IB v QY LCRO 242 / 2010 (10 February 2012) [pdf, 86 KB]

   ...a position’ in relation to the advice he gave, and that his representation of his clients was, or could have been, affected by concerns to protect the interests of the firm. Standards Committee enquiry [11] The New Zealand Law Society investigated the complaints and its decision sets out the background in some detail which I have considered necessary to restate here. It is clear from the Standards Committee file that all parties had a full opportunity to present their view...

2. ES v I Ltd & BI [2024] NZDT 143 (18 April 2024) [pdf, 145 KB]

   ...PLEASE NOTE: A rehearing will not be granted just because you disagree with the decision. Grounds for Appeal There are very limited grounds for appealing a decision of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the pr...

3. BC v BQ [2024] NZDT 390 (5 June 2024) [pdf, 142 KB]

   ...PLEASE NOTE: A rehearing will not be granted just because you disagree with the decision. Grounds for Appeal There are very limited grounds for appealing a decision of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the pr...

4. Auckland Standards Committee v Ram [2011] NZLCDT 32 [pdf, 82 KB]

   ...incorrectly, to be his employers and thus persons to whom he could provide regulated services under his “in-house” practising certificate. This all took place within a short time of his admission to practice, and his inexperience showed, attracting an investigation 4 which resulted in the charges to which he pleaded guilty. This episode highlights the need for the controls which exist on the right to practise on own account, and the value in new practitioners aligning themselves...

5. National Standards Committee 1 v Peters [2025] NZLCDT 20 (9 April 2025) [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...restrictive intervention”. We also considered the words of her Honour Winkelmann J in Hart where she said:6 …the manner in which the practitioner has responded to the charges may also be a significant factor. Willingness to participate fully in the investigative process, and to acknowledge error or wrongdoing where it has been established, may demonstrate insight by the practitioner into the causes and effects of the wrongdoing. This, coupled with acceptance of responsibility for...

6. MC v IS [2025] NZDT 145 (24 March 2025) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...PLEASE NOTE: A rehearing will not be granted just because you disagree with the decision. Grounds for Appeal There are very limited grounds for appealing a decision of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the pro...

7. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Bogiatto [2017] NZLCDT 27 [pdf, 302 KB]

   ...recurrence of the practice would not take place. Personal transactions [10] The respondent held funds in his trust account under several matters relating to his own affairs and investments. In respect of two such matters the ledgers recorded private and/or personal transactions from the trust accounts being payments to his family trust; his former partner; his current partner; payments for work carried out on property owned by the respondent’s partner but not related to the tru...

8. [2019] NZEmpC 40 Berry v The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment [pdf, 328 KB]

   ...that effect. He does not seek any monetary penalties. He seeks reimbursement of legal costs and a disbursement for a filing fee. Factual outline [4] On 9 March 2017 an incident occurred at the Authority’s Auckland office relating to an investigation meeting which was to be conducted that day. A delay occurred in commencing the meeting because one of the parties was not able to arrive at the Authority’s offices in time. A complaint was made against Ms Campbell by the oth...

9. Waitangi Tribunal - issue 58 of Te Manutukutuku [pdf, 675 KB]

   ...within the Port Nicholson district for a few goods and the promise of reserving one-tenth of the land for Mäori forever. When settlers arrived, they were at first wel- comed and the land shared. After the signing of the Treaty, the Crown had to investigate whether the Port Nicholson purchase was valid, and if so, to grant a legal title to the Company. The government appointed an English lawyer, William Spain, to in- vestigate the claim, but ignored his find- ings and changed his...

10. Karena v Allen - Te Koau A (2016) 55 Takitimu MB 148 (55 TKT 148) [pdf, 355 KB]

    ...are reasons why rent was withheld. 55 Tākitimu MB 153 [21] Counsel submits that Mr Karena believes that a number of concerns he has raised will not be dealt with by way of Waitangi Tribunal hearings as the issues are between the owners and private citizens rather than the Crown. [22] Mr Calver argues that the trustees’ lack of action demonstrates that they are either not prepared or lack the competence to address the significant concerns identified by Mr Karena. He says th...