Search Results

1. Hawkes Bay Standards Committee v Hancock [2011] NZLCDT 39 [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...The practitioner acknowledged the false certificates were to avoid detection by the inspectorate.  There is no suggestion that the practitioner could be excused by unfamiliarity or inexperience, having practiced for some 36 years and been responsible for a trust account for many of those years.  The disclosure of wrongdoing was not made until the Law Society inspector arrived to see the practitioner and remedial action to restore the trust account to its proper level was...

2. ZA v GL LCRO 258/2012 (31 March 2016) [pdf, 67 KB]

   ...submitted that: (a) The residence applications presented particular difficulties because of the family circumstances. (b) Communication with his clients was hampered by language difficulties. (c) Problems with non-payment of the levy were the responsibility of INZ. (d) Fees provided for services were fair and reasonable. [14] The Standards Committee delivered its decision on 7 September 2012. [15] The Committee determined, pursuant to s 138(2) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2...

3. KB v JR LCRO 246/2012 (20 May 2014) [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...answers relating to administration of the Trust, constitutes conduct to be considered in the context of a professional conduct complaint. The Respondent has answered the queries of the Applicant in the manner he sees fit and as instructed. These responses are subject to scrutiny by the Court if he has failed in his duty as a trustee. It is not however the function of this office or the Standards Committee, to undertake the Court’s role where a beneficiary remains dissatisfied...

4. Heng v Yap [2014] NZIACDT 65 (28 May 2014) [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...holding a licence. [12.2.2] The adviser had limited contact with the complainant, and unlicensed employees gave the initial advice, prepared the EOI application, and assessed the points the complainant could claim. 4 The Adviser’s Response [13] The adviser responded to the statement of complaint with a statement of reply. [14] In essence, the adviser’s response to the complaint is: [14.1] The initial advice regarding points was preliminary. The complainant had a on...

5. Complaint Assessment Committee 403 v Licensee B [2017] NZREADT 21 [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...A, but he had picked up the telephone and apologised to her once it had been drawn to his attention. [23] Ms Pender further submitted that the defendant had remained consistently contrite about having caused Ms A distress: he apologised in his response to the complaint, and in his response to the charge he continued to accept responsibility for his inappropriate and unacceptable comments. She submitted that the defendant had accepted that while Ms A was effectively his employee, h...

6. 2018 NZSSAA 007 (31 January 2018) [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...dealer the Ministry ignored those transactions. Whether or not that was favourable to the appellants depends on whether more went out to the dealer than came back in, or otherwise. The Appellant’s Case The evidence to answer and the general response from the appellants [9] The essential issue on which the two appeals turn is the conduct of the appellants. The Ministry has provided evidence based on bank accounts, and some statements from the appellants that demonstrate they...

7. Trustees of the JS & AJ Hamilton Family Trust v Complaints Assessment Committee 403, Amelia (Margaret) Reeve, Fleur Allinson & Kim Franklin [2017] NZREADT 54 [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...5.1 by not making any further attempt to provide the EQC information to the trustees, after two failed email attempts.9 [15] The Committee noted that Ms Reeve appeared (at best) to be unsure about the intent of a multi-offer form and said in response to the complaint that the form should have been presented to the trustees “at the outset”. The Committee considered that Ms Reeve’s response “[made] no sense”, as the second agreement was signed eight days after the appell...

8. LCRO 240/2017 O & B HN v JJ Lawyers (22 June 2018) [pdf, 237 KB]

   ...[21] The annexure opens with references to ss 9 and 11 of the Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA) followed by the submission that rr 2.11(c), 3.4, 8, 10.3, 11.3 and 11.4 of the LCCCR might be considered to have some bearing on [JJL]’s conduct. [JJL]’s response [22] Through Mr WA, [JJL] submits that the review application raises nothing that is new, hence his continued reliance on his 29 August 2017 response to the original complaint. [23] Beyond that he particularly presses the submi...

9. MBL v Shadforth [2016] NZIACDT 37 (3 August 2016) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...investigation, prosecution, and the costs of the Tribunal are all part of costs awards. [54] The complainant and the Registrar have elected not to apply for costs of investigation or representation. [55] Ms Shadforth has, without merit, denied responsibility for her conduct, and abused the Tribunal’s process. She also failed to comply with directions to seek an adjournment, and caused the hearing on sanctions to be abandoned at the last moment. These abuses of the disciplinary proced...

10. [2019] NZEmpC 22 Zhang v Telco Asset Management Ltd [pdf, 319 KB]

    ...concluded he may not be able to file a challenge within 28 days. Accordingly, he sent two emails to the Court attaching what he described as “Draft Form 2A”, which appears to have been an application for leave to extend time. [21] There was a response to each email by two members of the Registry. The first response explained that if the time for filing a challenge had expired, an application for leave to file a challenge out of time with an affidavit in support, a draft sta...