Search Results

1. Koppula v Zhou [2015] NZIACDT 85 (27 August 2015) [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...situation, and more recently surrendered her licence. [28.4] Ms Zhou did not gain anything from the fees clients paid, other than the fees indirectly contributing to her remuneration. [28.5] Ms Zhou now faces severe financial consequences given the responsibility she has for refunding fees and paying compensation. [28.6] Ms Zhou is willing to meet the financial obligations arising, as far as she can. [28.7] The reality of Ms Zhou’s financial position means that imposing penalties w...

2. Slinger v Zhou [2015] NZIACDT 87 (27 August 2015) [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...contrition. Significantly, she has surrendered her licence. [26.4] Ms Zhou did not gain anything from the fees clients paid, other than the fees indirectly contributing to her remuneration. [26.5] Ms Zhou now faces severe financial consequences given the responsibility she has for refunding fees and paying compensation. [26.6] Ms Zhou is willing to meet the financial obligations arising, as far as she can. [26.7] The reality of Ms Zhou’s financial position is that imposing penalties...

3. Recording Industry Association of New Zealand v CAL012-E000609 [2013] NZCOP 5 [pdf, 61 KB]

   ...2 Section 122A(1). 3 going through transitioning from military life in Afghanistan to life back home in NZ, and I’m not fit to tackle this allegation made against me. However I take full responsibility for the acts committed under my IP address and wish for this to be resolved asap. I am willing to co-operate by any means required of me.” [10] The Applicant responded by way of a further letter of submissions dated 29 Novembe

4. Pick-A-Part Tauranga Ltd 30 September 2014 NZSHD 11 [pdf, 51 KB]

   ...the time will reveal how many vehicles were involved (if that is deemed to be relevant)”. . [52] There is no evidence before the Authority of a breach of the Act in respect of more than one vehicle. If other vehicles were involved it was the responsibility of the Police to gather up all the relevant evidence and present it to the Authority as part of their Complaint if they wished it be taken into account. [53] The Authority notes also that this is a Complaint against a company. Th...

5. ADM Ltd v ZWN and ADN v ZWM [2011] NZDT 162 (14 January 2011) [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...the truck and excavator. A hirer’s liability for damage to hired equipment is specified in clauses 7.1 and 7.2 of the Agreement: 7.1. Subject to clause 10 (Insurance – Damage Waiver on Hire), in the case of hired equipment, the Hirer is responsible for any loss or damage to the equipment from the time the Hirer takes possession of the equipment until it is returned to the Owner’s possession ...” 7.2. In the case of damage to the equipment, however caused, the Hirer shall...

6. CP v XF LCRO 191 / 2010 (20 June 2011) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...outset of the hearing, I observed that if the Applicant retained concerns as to the quality of the Respondent’s representation of J following completion of this review, she may consider addressing her concerns to the Family Court which is 3 responsible for appointments of lawyer for the child under the Care of Children Act 2004. The Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 [9] The Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 came into force on 1 August 2008. Complaints about conduct pri...

7. Portsoy v Riding LCRO 55 / 2010 (4 August 2010) [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...This appears from the Applicant‟s letter sent to the Standards Committee in January 2010 which provided greater insight into the nature of their grievance against the Practitioner. It suggested that they considered that the Practitioner had a responsibility to protect their interests, by ensuring that the work was confined to that provided by the terms of the Settlement Agreement, and that payments were confined to the Pricing Schedule, and to keep them informed throughout. [20...

8. CA v BD LCRO 31/2012 (5 December 2014) [pdf, 45 KB]

   ...CA’s instructions to her. When CA also raised concerns with her over the size of her bill and the timeliness of her work, BD declined to reduce her fees, and did not accept the criticisms around timeliness. [4] CA was not satisfied with BD’s responses to her concerns, so when BD’s firm attempted to recover her fees, CA she laid a complaint to the New Zealand Law Society (NZLS). 2 Standards Committee [5] The Standards Committee considered CA’s complaints that...

9. Austin & Ors v Houghton & Ors [2014] NZWHT Auckland 6 [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...out during the period he or Ikotec were covered by Vero Insurance as the Austins had accepted a settlement payment from Vero covering this period (November 2000 - November 2001). [15] Mr Austin considers that Mr Houghton should have taken responsibility for the remedial work and should have arranged for a proper inspection of the roof which would have discovered the apron flashing defects and resulted in the design of a remedial solution. [16] In his brief, Barry Gill stat...

10. Auckland District Law Society v Dorbu [2009] NZLCDT 3 [pdf, 151 KB]

    ...referred the file to counsel for further advice. [7] On 14 March 2006 Mr B made a complaint through his solicitors. As a result of this specific complaint and further correspondence between the Society and counsel for Mr Dorbu, explanations and responses concerning this complaint continued until mid-August 2006. On 21 July 2006 a second complaint was received by the Society from solicitors for Mr B. Correspondence took place between the Society and the practitioner between July...