Search Results

1. Cheema v Lepcha [2011] NZIACDT 16 (20 June 2011) [pdf, 89 KB]

   ...provides an important privilege to licensed immigration advisers in allowing them exclusively to provide immigration advice (along with exempt persons). However, consistent with that, licensed advisers carry professional obligations. They are personally responsible for the professional relationship. [24] I find the Adviser was a party to the unlawful provision of immigration advice by SN. [25] That amounts to a breach of clause 1.1 of the Code which requires that the Adviser act with p...

2. HJ v MN LCRO 26/2013 (11 March 2015) [pdf, 149 KB]

   ...hearing. 2 Companies Office Register, [PRL] [(Company No.) In Liquidation]. 3 Letter HJ to NZLS (21 December 2010). 3 [10] Mr HJ was also concerned that the advice Mr MN had given him had exposed him to increased risk, and he holds Mr MN responsible for the consequences when those risks materialised. He also says that Mr MN did not give him any terms of engagement or explain his rights as a director and shareholder in [PRL]. [11] Mr MN accepted that he did not provide terms...

3. Notes from Crown Maori Relations Regional Hui at Manutuke Marae on 21 April [pdf, 423 KB]

   ...Crown/Māori Relations portfolio. The relationship is not with Pākeha and their voice in strengthening the Crown/Māori relationship is not warranted or required. The relationship is between Māori and the Crown. The Government’s partnership responsibilities are with hapū, iwi and the mandated organisations that represent them. All of these entities need to be recognised as partners with the Crown. Gisborne Crown/Māori Relations hui notes (21 April 2018) Page 4 of 6...

4. Notes from Crown Maori Relations hui in Gisborne on 21 April 2018 [pdf, 423 KB]

   ...Crown/Māori Relations portfolio. The relationship is not with Pākeha and their voice in strengthening the Crown/Māori relationship is not warranted or required. The relationship is between Māori and the Crown. The Government’s partnership responsibilities are with hapū, iwi and the mandated organisations that represent them. All of these entities need to be recognised as partners with the Crown. Gisborne Crown/Māori Relations hui notes (21 April 2018) Page 4 of 6...

5. Notes from Crown Maori Relations hui Gisborne 21 April 2018 [pdf, 433 KB]

   ...Crown/Māori Relations portfolio. The relationship is not with Pākeha and their voice in strengthening the Crown/Māori relationship is not warranted or required. The relationship is between Māori and the Crown. The Government’s partnership responsibilities are with hapū, iwi and the mandated organisations that represent them. All of these entities need to be recognised as partners with the Crown. Gisborne Crown/Māori Relations hui notes (21 April 2018) Page 4 of 6...

6. Morgan v Accident Compensation Corporation [2018] NZACA 2 [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...months of the accident, from 23 September to 11 November 1988. [13] Ms Morgan subsequently requested on a number of occasions a re- calculation, based on the prospective income she would have earned had she been able to commence work at Morgans. In response, the Corporation wrote to her on 27 September 2013 and again on 26 November 2013 confirming the 1994 decision. [14] The dispute between Ms Morgan and the Corporation led to mediation on 7 July 2016, where it was agreed that Ms...

7. Supplementary Order Paper on Taxation (Annual Rates for 2020-21, Feasibility Expenditure and Remedial Matters) Bill [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...SOP amends the Tax Administration Act 1994 (the principal Act), the Income Tax Act 2007, the KiwiSaver Act 2006 and the Unclaimed Money Act 1971. These amendments fall into three categories: policies progressed as part of the Government’s COVID-19 response, changes to policies already included in the Bill, and remedial and technical amendments. 6. Our advice focuses on cl 69C, which is one of the remedial and technical amendments to the principal Act. We have not identified any Bill of...

8. WXY v Attorney-General (Strike-Out Application) [2014] NZHRRT 37 [pdf, 59 KB]

   ...daughter and this is discrimination as their son and daughter are treated differently. Family status [10] For the purpose of the HRA the term “family status” is defined in s 21(1)(l) as follows: (l) family status, which means— (i) having the responsibility for part-time care or full-time care of children or other dependants; or (ii) having no responsibility for the care of children or other dependants; or (iii) being married to, or being in a civil union or de facto relati...

9. Review Subcommittees v PG 22/2016 (30 November 2016) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...the owners who then printed them out. (e) Fee estimates for the same work obtained from two other law firms were $350 plus GST and disbursements, totalling $502.50, in contrast to the $550 fee (total cost $749.37) charged by XM. [7] In response PQ argued that the fee charged was fair and reasonable and made the following submissions: (a) Because of his clients’ obligation to pay rental under the head lease it was essential that the rent due for each apartment was correct a...

10. Territorial Authorities - EiC - P R Greenwood -Planning (4 Feb 2021) [pdf, 1.6 MB]

    ...Water Services Manager. 2. I hold a NZ Certificate NZCAD I also hold a B Grade Water Treatment Certificate Opus Consultancy Training. 3. I have worked in infrastructure management roles since 1996 in New Zealand. 4. In my role with CODC I am responsible for overseeing the infrastructure to deliver community water supply. Purpose and scope of evidence 5. I am providing evidence as a representative of CODC, a territorial authority (TA) holding responsibilities relating to t...