Search Results

1. Yu v CAC 20006 & Guo [2014] NZREADT 60 [pdf, 40 KB]

   ...and fixture was made for 30 April 2014 with a standard timetable to that. Then the hearing date needed to be amended and the parties proposed a fixture for 30 June 2014 but our Registry could not obtain confirmation from the appellant or, indeed, a response from the appellant because on 11 June 2014 his counsel withdrew. Discussion [32] We agree that it is for the appellant, having brought this appeal, to advance his case and, if he does not attend the hearing, he runs the risk that...

2. Maserow v CAC404 & Ors [2016] NZREADT 19 [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...salesperson and agent. As well as that he proofed the office’s ads, dealt with queries, managed the property management division, attended management meetings, arranged training, managed all employment and staffing matters, all licensing matters and was responsible for the financial transactions and the day-to-day running of the branch. [12] He told the Tribunal that the Howick branch prepared an average of 50 agreements for sale and purchase very month. However it had never been his...

3. Waters v Alpine Energy Ltd (Adjournment Application) [2015] NZHRRT 17 [pdf, 59 KB]

   ...evidence and for that reason a written application supported by a “will say” statement of evidence is usually required. The application must establish proper grounds for the Tribunal to issue a summons. [28] The party applying for the summons is responsible for its service once it has been issued by the Tribunal. [29] It is to be noted that s 111 of the Human Rights Act provides that every witness attending before the Tribunal to give evidence pursuant to a summons is entitled to b...

4. Tomov v Auckland Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 48 [pdf, 101 KB]

   ...basis of Defect 5) was a surprising one. This is because right up until that point counsel for the claimants believed that the Council was denying any liability to the claimants. The Council did not make the concession in its statement of response and the evidence of Mr Flay (which was silent on Defect 5) negated any suggestion of Council liability. It is said that Mr Flay’s evidence cannot be reconciled with the concession made about Defect 5 and that the omission of refe...

5. UY v Bunbury LCRO 17 / 2012 (4 March 2013) - Publication decision [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...consumers of legal services. [15] It is helpful to recall the findings in the substantive decision: With regard to [Company Ea}, I found that “Dr Bunbury’s conduct was not acceptable according to the standards of “competent, ethical and responsible practitioners.”5 He failed to properly advise Mr UY as to the content of the documents sent to him for signing and provided an untrue certificate to [Firm B]. Consumers of legal services expect that their lawyers will advise...

6. Complaints Assessment Committee 409 v Andrew Rankin [2017] NZREADT 78 [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...decision include the nature and gravity of the charges, the manner in which the practitioner has responded to the charges (such as the practitioner’s willingness to co-operate in the investigation, to acknowledge error or wrongdoing, and to accept responsibility for the conduct), and the practitioner’s previous disciplinary history.5 Submissions [13] Mr Waalkens submitted for the Committee that Mr Rankin’s inaction after he received the initial report, and his failure to as...

7. BORA Wills Bill [pdf, 381 KB]

   ...an approach here. 24. On the basis of these considerations we have concluded that the prima facie discrimination on the grounds of age and marital status can be considered to be justified under section 5 of the BORA as a reasonably proportionate response to an important and significant objective. Potential Discrimination of Effect on a Will of Marital Status 25. Clauses 18 and 19 of the Bill: 25.1 provide that a will made by a person of 18 years or older is revoked if the testator ma...

8. [2010] NZCA 385 CA504/2009 Bluestar Print Group NZ Ltd v Mitchell [pdf, 34 KB]

   ...through even standing here today in front of you I should not be standing here but it’s been quite an experience I must say. [14] There is no indication that Mr Mitchell abandoned the claim. In fact the reverse is the case. His first response above relates to compensation that he might have been able to recover from Printlink had he not received ACC payments. The availability of ACC payments does not affect a plaintiff’s entitlement to exemplary damages. In the sec...

9. AR v PI LCRO 157/2013 (10 October 2014) [pdf, 116 KB]

   ...client chooses to instruct a lawyer to disregard instructions which they have previously acknowledged were irrevocable, a lawyer cannot be compelled to act in contravention of the client’s current instructions. It is the client who must take responsibility for breaching any declarations of irrevocability. [27] Before Mr AR made payment in accordance with the authority, it was withdrawn. Mr AR was obliged to follow his client’s current instructions with regard to the funds in...

10. Re Tai Rakena No. 2 (Rejection of Statement of Claim) [2018] NZHRRT 5 [pdf, 160 KB]

    ...2016. [7.1.2] On 20 December 2016 he was told the prison Health Centre no longer had the form. A Corrections officer recorded: This request/complaint has been forwarded onto the Health centre manager at Rimutaka Prison. I have received a response from the Health centre Manager from Rimutaka and she has told me that they no longer have that form that Tairakena is requesting. So there was nothing more I can do about this issue. 3 [7.2] The first page of a partly redacted (b...