Search Results

1. RQ v TS LCRO 178/2012 (23 June 2015) [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...Review Officer has a broad discretion to look at matters afresh, the scope of that discretion does not extend to considering fresh complaints raised on review which were not the subject of inquiry before the Standards Committee. 4 [11] In response, Ms TS submits that:  She had explained the purpose of the settlement conference to Ms RQ prior to attending the conference.  She was a few minutes late for the conference, but that had no influence or effect on the procee...

2. BB & AB v CC LCRO 134/2012 (26 August 2015) [pdf, 47 KB]

   ...towards her and others in his office.2 It considered whether Mr CC had failed to honour undertakings regarding Ms BB’s employment, payment and training, and failing to pay her for services she had rendered.3 [7] The Committee noted Mr CC’s response about his intentions towards Ms BB, difficulties he had experienced in paying her, and his attempts to make amends. The Committee also considered whether Mr CC’s conduct towards Ms BB had been deliberately misleading and dece...

3. Williamson v Tangilanu [2012] NZIACDT 13 (28 March 2012) [pdf, 108 KB]

   ...issue for determination is whether the complaint that Ms Tangilanu ignored her obligations under the code of Conduct and acted dishonestly is established, after considering all of the material before the Tribunal. The Complaint, and the Adviser’s Response [9] The key events and circumstances raised by the complaint were: [9.1] Mr Hakaumotu engaged Ms Tangilanu to apply for a visitor’s visa. In January 2009 Ms Tangilanu made the application for a fee of $150. The application was...

4. OM v PR LCRO 118 / 2011 (14 August 2012) [pdf, 89 KB]

   ...that the Agreement had been returned to the firm (or returned in an amended form), or that the payment had been made. It is unlikely that the Practitioner himself would have made the entry in the firm’s trust ledger. [33] I accept that the responsibility for accurate recording of receipts lies with the firm, but whether there was a receipting error by the firm, or whether there was inadequate communication surrounding the payment is a question that cannot be resolved. On the b...

5. LH v NT LCRO 86/2015 (20 April 2016) [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...specialised knowledge and responsibility …: … (f) complexity … and … novelty …: … (m) … market [forces]. [34] It is clear that Mr LH was a client who contacted Mr NT on a very frequent basis – each of those contacts required a response from Mr NT. Mr NT advised Mr LH that him responding in this manner was incurring further fees. [35] The argument of a non-delegable duty of care owed by Mr MD to Mr LH was a novel one, with no clear supporting case law being...

6. E49 Paul Crimmins - Air Quality - EIC - Council [pdf, 718 KB]

   ...of the assessment of the regional air discharge aspects of the Application contained in my Report (Assessment of the Application); (c) An overview of the outcome of expert witness conferencing, referring to the JWS where appropriate, and a brief response to the Applicant’s evidence (Update Following Expert Witness Conferencing / Response to Applicant’s Evidence); (d) Comments on proposed conditions (Conditions); and (e) Conclusions. 6. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6.1 The Applicant...

7. E61 Mark Gibson - Corporate - EIC - Sealink [pdf, 697 KB]

   ...Waiheke  supplies.    It  should be noted that there is no electricity on Great Barrier and the carriage of  fuel is necessary for the operation of generators and essential services such as  Ambulance  and  Fire  response.    Additionally  we  carry  heavy  machinery  enabling  infrastructure  repairs  and  maintenance  for  Great  Barrier  and  Waiheke.  This  can  be  for  routine  maintenance  and  emergency  response  follow...

8. E40 Marija Jukic - Contaminant Discharge - EIC - Council [pdf, 772 KB]

   ...overview of the assessment of the contaminant discharge aspects of the Application contained in my Report (Assessment of the Application); (c) An update following expert witness conferencing, referring to the JWS where appropriate, and a brief response to the Applicant’s evidence (Update Following Expert Witness Conferencing / Response to Applicant’s Evidence); (d) Comments on draft conditions and proposed mitigation (Conditions / Mitigation); and (e) Conclusions. 5.2 I no...

9. [2018] NZEnvC 140 Mawhinney v Auckland Council [pdf, 2.5 MB]

   ...email a copy of this decision to Ms Low, as solicitor for some of the landowners. [22J There is some (hearsay) evidence in Mr Duncan's affidavit that suggests some of the landowners are feeling harassed by Mr Mawhinney's activities. His response is recorded in his 191h affidavit. I hope it is not necessary but I warn all parties that the Environment Court will not tolerate bullying or harassment of any kind: whether it is of the applicant, of landowners or tenants, or of t...

10. [2017] NZEnvC 140 Pierau v Auckland Council [pdf, 3.9 MB]

    ...Appendix A. [8] The parties have not yet resolved the issues of costs as amongst themselves. We refrain from expressing any interim tentative view. Any application for costs is to be lodged within 15 working days of the date of this decision and response or responses within a further 15 working days. We will attend to the issue on the papers. For the court: LJ Newhook Principal Environment Judge APPENDIX A Consent Conditions Under section 108 of the RMA, this consent is su...