Search Results

1. Orsborn v CAC 20006 & Warwick Collier & JVL Prestige Realty Ltd [2012] NZREADT 73 [pdf, 51 KB]

   ...compensation for misrepresentation as to the area of the property. [c] An order that the licensee and the agency pay the appellants’ costs in respect of the investigation and prosecution of the complaint both before the Committee and us. [4] In response, the second respondents submit that the Committee’s decision should be upheld. The Basic Facts [5] On 13 May 2011, the vendors of the property signed a sole agency agreement with the agency for the sale of the property...

2. [2015] NZEmpC 232 Bidvest New Zealand Limited v FIRST Union Inc reasons for interlocutory [pdf, 132 KB]

   ...separate notices of the intention of its members to take strike action for two periods of 24 hours, the first from 9 pm on 20 December to 9 pm on 21 December 2015, and the second from 9 pm on 23 December to 9 pm on 24 December 2015. [6] Bidvest’s response was to advise the Union that it considered that these notices were defective in that they did not provide 14 days of notice before the intended strike action. That was because, in Bidvest’s view, the employees were engaged in...

3. ENVC Hearing 6Oct14 AT evidence chief legal submissions [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...Auckland Council controlled organisation' and the local and regional transport authority for the Auckland Region. Its purpose is to contribute to an effective, efficient and safe Auckland land transport system in the public interest. 2 AT is responsible for the roads, footpaths, parking and public transport in Auckland. 4 In short, AT's main tasks include: a to design, build and maintain Auckland's roads, ferry wharves, cycleways and walkways, including monitorin...

4. Fagan v CAC 20005 & Sinclair [2013] NZREADT 64 [pdf, 50 KB]

   ...(inclusive of GST). The purchaser subsequently put its offer at $1,550,000 plus GST which the appellant (as controller for the vendor family) felt required to accept, due to financial circumstances and pressure from a mortgagee. Complaint and Response [9] The appellant contends that the licensee’s disclosure of the GST registration status of the vendors was contrary to an explicit instruction given by him. It is put for the appellant that the licensee’s disclosure allowed the pu...

5. Klee v CAC 10064 & Little [2012] NZREADT 40 [pdf, 54 KB]

   ...unhappy with this state of affairs and offered compensation through additional advertising at no cost. We confirm those views of the Committee. [31] Mr Wimsett put it that the fundamental point for us to decide is the extent to which the licensee is responsible for the situation of concern to the appellant and his wife, i.e. that Bayleys would simply not permit the use of the word “Auction” embedded in red on an advertising photograph of a property under their brand. At that poin...

6. McLachlan v CAC 10048 & Hegan [2012] NZREADT 39 [pdf, 51 KB]

   ...meeting between them on about 8 May 2010 by which time the appellant was thinking of placing the property on the market in late August 2010 either with the licensee, or privately, or with another agent. The appellant asserts that the licensee’s response to that was that the appellant could now sell to anyone he chose. The appellant put it to the licensee that the appellant would like to pay him for his efforts to date and was very pleasantly surprised to find that no money was owing t...

7. Harvey v CAC 10063 & Kelsall [2012] NZREADT 21 [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...unsatisfactory conduct as alleged. We note that the Committee deferred making any decision on publication until a further hearing on penalty. The Committee’s substantive reasoning was as follows: “4. Discussion 4.1 The Licensee, in his response to the first complaint, i.e. an alleged breach of confidentiality, does not really address the appropriateness or propriety of what he wrote in the newspaper article but rather seeks to affirm the accuracy of what is there. He conclude...

8. Otago Standards Committee v Klinkert [2014] NZLCDT 60 [pdf, 85 KB]

   ...application, pointing out that the funds held in the practitioner’s trust account as of June 2006 were an asset of the Zs, thus included when calculating total assets against the relevant threshold to qualify for the subsidy. 2 (g) In response the practitioner created a document “File Statement Between the Date 1 AUG 2005… 10 OCT 2006” 3 1 Bundle of documents at 163. that falsely showed the Zs’ funds...

9. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee v Parlane [2011] NZLCDT 3 [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...particulars that had not been proven, or which were found not to contribute to a finding of misconduct, Mr Parlane said he should not be liable for any costs. [14] Mr Parlane did not accept that he had been difficult and obstructive, and that he was responsible, by his actions and approach, for contributing to costs beyond what might otherwise have arisen. [15] Mr Parlane suggested the matter should have been dealt with by some form of settlement early on in proceedings, but instead...

10. McCarthy & Anor v CAC 20007 & Anor [2014] NZREADT 94 [pdf, 53 KB]

    ...search, a LIM and a due diligence clause. The Tribunal accept that these events took place soon after the 2008 Act came into force and thus the change in an agent’s obligations was relatively new. But this did not obviate Mr Matutinovich’s responsibility/obligations under the Act. Mr Matutinovich did explain that the neighbouring property was owned by a mine. It would be contrary to common sense if any potential purchaser, when given this information, did not ask a follow-up ques...