Search Results

1. LCRO 234/2017 and 172/2018 YA and XB v WD and VS (9 April 2019) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...about half an hour in preparing the application for probate. [59] The fee of $11,950 reflects the time and labour expended primarily by Ms WD. Not all of the time she recorded was billed. The respondents’ skill, specialised knowledge, and responsibility required to perform the services properly is referred to above. It was no less important to Mr XB and Ms YA as Executors that the Estate was competently administered than it was to them as beneficiaries, although the respondents...

2. [2020] NZEnvC 137 Oceana Gold New Zealand Limited v Otago Regional Council [pdf, 312 KB]

   ...taxon, other than mānuka (Leptospermum scoparium), under the New Zealand Threat Classification System (“NZTCS”). B: Costs are reserved. Any application should be made by 11 September 2020 and any reply within 10 working days, with a final response within a further 5 working days. Applications are not encouraged. REASONS Table of Contents Para 1. Introduction [1] 1.1 What is the issue? [1] 1.2 The proceeding so far [2] 1.3 The common ground and the issues...

3. LCRO 94/2019 EL v UD (15 May 2020) [pdf, 190 KB]

   ...concluding his complaint, Mr EL opined that “the eventual cost to ratepayers for all the negligence, collusion, corruption and fraud that surrounds the issue relative to the ratepayer base was very significant”. [11] Mr UD was invited to provide a response to the complaint but elected not to do so. [12] The Standards Committee tasked with completing investigation into Mr EL’s complaints, identified the issues to be considered as: (a) whether Mr UD had failed to advise the C...

4. LCRO 21/2019 IV v EC and HL (21 December 2020) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...been made by Mrs AW’s friends, who advised that they were the ones to be appointed as her attorneys. The LCRO commented:18 What is central to this complaint is the professional judgement of a lawyer. [42] The LCRO continued:19 It is the responsibility of practitioners to be alert to circumstances where further enquiry ought to be made, and to be able to undertake basic steps that can assure them of their client’s legal capacity. [43] The Standards Committee had made a find...

5. Phillips v King - Phillips Whanau Trust (2020) 418 Aotea MB 249 (418 AOT 249) [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...application to terminate the Trust was filed by Henry Williams Phillips and is dated 12 April 2019. A copy of the application was forwarded to all of the trustees of the Trust on 23 April 2019. Henare King, the chairperson of the Trust, filed a response to the application on 12 May 2019. The Court then directed that a copy of Henare King’s response be provided to the applicant, which occurred on 18 June 2019. The application was set down for hearing on 18 July 2020 in Palmerston...

6. Wellington Standards Committee 2 v Harper [2020] NZLCDT 29 (11 September 2020) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...the complaints process has been particularly protracted in this case. As noted above, the complaints arrived to the Standards Committee in four tranches of large files which required a good deal of work to put to the practitioner, analyse her response and assess which matters were proper to pursue, have determined by the Standards Committee and then be put in the cogent and organised form required for presentation as particulars in support of a charge once the matter had been refer...

7. White and Te Korowai Tiaki o Te Hauāuru Incorporated Society v Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Tama Trust (2020) 415 Aotea MB 164 (415 AOT 164) [pdf, 290 KB]

   ...Te Korowai to prevent the Rūnanga from entering into an agreement with the New Zealand Transport Agency (“NZTA”) regarding the Mt Messenger roading project. [2] The substantive proceedings have progressed since then. In summary: (a) In response to the directions set out in my decision of 23 October 2019, the Rūnanga filed a substantive report regarding how the Rūnanga’s membership committee determines eligibility to be a beneficiary of the Rūnanga (“the Membership R...

8. [2022] NZIACDT 19 – TA v Tian (Sanctions) (25 July 2022) [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...maximum amount. He would also appreciate some compensation for the legal fees the family had to pay to obtain justice and for him to have the chance to study again. Ms Tian had deliberately deceived him over and over again. She had not taken any responsibility or apologised to him for what she had done. [17] In the complainant’s view, Ms Tian’s licence should be cancelled for as long as possible to protect others. She has now been found guilty of serious misconduct four ti...

9. Cunliffe & Cunliffe v Helensville Primary School Board of Trustees [2024] NZHRRT 4 [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...requests in accordance with the PA 1993? [11.2] If not, was there an interference with Mr and Ms Cunliffe’s privacy? [11.3] If there was an interference with Mr and Ms Cunliffe’s privacy, what, if anything, is the appropriate remedy? RESPONSE TO THE INFORMATION PRIVACY REQUESTS [12] The PA 19932 entitles an individual to make an information privacy request and prescribes the requirements for responding to that request. [13] There are two key components to a response to...

10. 2023-10-10-Rebuttal-Evidence-of-A-Craig-Hydrology-and-Flooding.pdf [pdf, 17 MB]

    ...TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................... 1 RESPONSE TO MS CARTER AND MRS PROUSE ............................................... 3 RESPONSE TO MR KINLEY ................................................................................... 7 RESPONSE TO MR MCARTHUR ............................