15695 items matching your search terms
...including settlement of the sale proceeds of the family home on the trust, and also “any issues of undue influence” by Dr OR. He asked for a copy of the trust deed, copies of Mr and Mrs OR’s wills, and any other relevant documents. [11] In her response (by email) dated 16 July 2018, Ms KD said when she met with Mrs OR in October 2016, she had “concerns that the family home was gifted into the 3 Mr NQ was a partner of [Law fir...
...$5,000, and to undergo training or education by completing Unit Standard 23136: “Demonstrate knowledge of misleading and deceiving conduct and misrepresentation”. [36] The Committee said: 3.8 The Committee considers that [Ms Edwards’] response [in penalty submissions on her behalf] indicates a failure to fully understand her professional obligations in regard to accuracy and disclosure, and is a failure to accept responsibility for the mistakes for which findings of unsati...
...confidentiality or privilege. [28] As to the conflict of interest finding against him in relation to the protection order proceedings, Mr NS submitted that the Facebook material was so lacking in weight and worth as to not require any challenge or response. The fact that Ms P had been a client of his (in an earlier application by her for a protection order against Mr L), was of no moment. [29] Mr NS raised other Family Court procedural matters but, as the central point is wheth...
...Lukas’ assertions that Mr BW had been informed of that on several occasions, but that has no relevance to the complaints made by Dr CV and Mr BW about the advice and service provided by Mr Lukas. [69] Mr Lukas implies that it was Mr BW’s responsibility to complete the application forms and provide all supporting material. In essence, he asserts that the fact the application was initially rejected was Mr BW’s responsibility. [70] Mr Lukas practices as a barrister. The commo...
...From 2015 to early 2017, he had relied on staff and agents employed by Cross Country in Manila to assist in the provision of services to job seekers and immigration applicants. He now recognised this did not comply with the Code. He took complete responsibility for the business practices adopted. [36] According to Mr De’Ath’s statement, Cross Country started out as a recruitment company for the dairy industry in 2012. He had become a licensed immigration adviser in 2014. The...
...Committee, having completed that inquiry, had determined to take no further steps. [22] That matter does not form part of this review and I need reference it no further. [23] Mr AD was given the opportunity to respond to the complaint. In his response of 22 July 2014, he submitted that: (a) the letter of 18 March 2014 was sent for a proper purpose; (b) he denied he has breached any Rules, specifically rr 2.3 and 2.7, as complained of; (c) his letter was sent on his clients’ i...
...this set of symptoms that he was an individual subject to abnormal illness behaviour. There is no evidence previously of any dependency seeking behaviour, not of the use of medical or surgical symptoms in order to foster an avoidance of work responsibilities, or indeed of life responsibilities generally. Rather, the opposite is the case. Following exposure to glutaraldehyde, he developed a set of symptoms, also reported by others in his workplace, and in other environments (e.g....
...consider that this is necessarily duplication. In my opinion, QLDC and ORC have different functions and therefore different considerations when assessing the adverse effects of earthworks for residential development. Ultimately, ORC is solely responsible for managing the discharge of sediment to land and, in my view, needs to be able to manage the land use that leads to the discharge in order to proactively manage the activity in an integrated way. 10 Ms Hunter has proposed an...
...provide time records had been ignored; and (l) fees charged were excessive. [12] Initially the Complaints Service determined that Ms WP’s complaints would be considered by an Early Resolution Services Committee and the lawyers provided an initial response to Ms WP’s complaints on 20 December 2023. [13] On 4 April 2024, the parties were advised that the complaints had been referred to another Standards Committee, and on 9 April 2024, [Law firm] were invited to provide a further re...
...for victims of retail crime and the Privacy Commission report on facial recognition. On 11 August 2025, your request was transferred in part under section 14 of the Act by Hon Paul Goldsmith’s Office to the Ministry of Justice (the Ministry), for response. I will be responding to the following part of your request: Re the Ministerial Advisory Group for victims of retail crime and the Privacy Commission report on facial recognition, the Minister said today, “I expect our Ministerial...