Search Results

1. General Standards Committee 2 v Baker and Yoon [2019] NZLCDT 1 [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...10 Appendix 1 CENSURE Mr Yoon, as trust account supervisor you held a special duty to the clients of your firm and to your professional body to carry out your obligations with diligence and the utmost good faith. You failed in these responsibilities, firstly by taking short cuts in reviewing the monthly trust account reconciliations, which you must in future scrutinise with great care. Secondly, by misleading your professional body, the New Zealand Law Society, by the fi...

2. LCRO 142/2016 TR v YV (28 November 2018) [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...relation to other court proceedings that she was eligible. She swears that she spoke to a lawyer at a Community Law Centre who said “he doubted that [she] would be entitled to legal aid because this was an estate matter”. Ms OP received similar responses to further enquiries at the [Area] office of the Legal Services Agency and the regional centre in [Region]. [52] Ms OP swears she knew Mr YV was not a legal aid provider as she had been dealing with him on other matters. S...

3. EQE v ICQ [2019] NZIACDT 37 (6 June 2019) [pdf, 189 KB]

   ...requested it. [66] There is insufficient evidence of negligence or a breach of the obligation in cl 1 to be professional and to take due care. [67] The complainant blames [the adviser] for his predicament, but the evidence does not establish she is responsible for the failure of his application. The real problem was that he was already unlawfully in New Zealand when he approached her. Nor do I regard [the adviser] as responsible for the failure of the essential skills application....

4. [2018] NZEnvC 162 Doig v Marlborough District Council [pdf, 3.2 MB]

   ...by a telephone conference. 31 Costs sought by Mr Doig Landscape [32] Mr Doig observes that his initial need to brief evidence was because of the conclusions reached by the Commissioner. However, he argues that the Council has failed in its responsibility to identify deficiencies in the Council hearing and the reasons given for its decision. The appellant says that a local authority acting reasonably would make inquiries with a duly qualified expert as to whether the Council&#039...

5. Regulatory Impact Analysis - Addressing the theft of Livestock Rustling in New Zealand [pdf, 159 KB]

   ...where the household has a single adult (or where one partner is absent for extended periods).5 2.4 Are there any constraints on the scope for decision making? The Minister of Justice has directed officials to consider legislative options for response, including specific offences. These options could be supplemented by non-legislative responses but have not been considered in the course of this analysis. 2.5 What do stakeholders think? Key stakeholders are farmers an...

6. TQ v FW LCRO 214/2015 (27 September 2016) [pdf, 64 KB]

   ...harassment. There is evidence of some repetition, but Ms FW has answered all of the concerns raised by Mr TQ on the basis that her persistence is a product of his unresponsiveness. There is no proper basis on which to say she has been untruthful. Her responses are cogent and provide a reasonable basis for her conduct. [58] One of Mr TQ’s concerns is that Ms FW did not communicate with XX. He says she knew from previous dealings that XX was the company’s human resources consultan...

7. Pirini v Ure - Oakura Pa (2020) 425 Aotea MB 237 (425 AOT 237) [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...was resolved, to an extent, simply because as she pointed out she claimed, the trustees did not have a quorum present and therefore did not have the authority to make that decision. Should there be any repeat of this behaviour then the trustees responsible should consider themselves on notice that they may face removal. [42] Turning to the allegations of abuse, aggressive behaviour and general misconduct on the part of Mr Ure, as foreshadowed, if those allegations are correct, then t...

8. [2020] NZREADT 05 - Eade - Ruling (21 February 2020) [pdf, 234 KB]

   ...Authority that the appellants have not explained why this material was not obtained and placed before the Committee. She further submitted that in any event, the issue is whether the second respondents’ representations should attract disciplinary responsibility, and the inclusion of the timeline of representations would not make a material difference to the outcome of the appeal. This is because the Authority does not understand there to be any dispute as to the nature and timin...

9. LCRO 150/2018 LO v RS, NL and TA (28 June 2019) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...Mr LO was a beneficiary. He said that Mr TA took on the role of instructing Mr RS and Ms NL, without Mr LO’s authority. 4 [25] Moreover, Mr TA paid the barristers’ fees from the trust’s funds; again, without Mr LO’s authority. Responses [26] Although invited to provide their responses to Mr LO’s complaint, all three practitioners elected not to do so. Standards Committee hearing and decision [27] The Standards Committee identified the issue as “whether Mr LO...

10. LCRO 112/2019 EQ v XD (30 July 2021) [pdf, 162 KB]

    ...there was evidence on occasions of Mr EQ taking some time to respond to communications received, considering the number of parties 3 involved in the transaction, the delays were insufficient to establish reasonable grounds for a disciplinary response; and (d) whilst Mr EQ could have done better in keeping parties informed as to the reasons for the delay that occurred, it was satisfied overall with this aspect of Mr EQ’s conduct; (e) it should have been obvious to Mr EQ as he...