Search Results

1. [2016] NZSSAA 028 (20 April 2016) [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...through a direct contribution scheme. If Parliament had intended to create such a distinction, it could have done so by far more direct means than by the use of the words “for any of the contingencies. [30] In Boljevic, Kós J approved these statements in the following way: [34] These cases confirm that the sources of a contribution is irrelevant to the inquiry. The focus is on the nature of the payment, and the contingency it is paid out upon. ..... That consideration is consist...

2. UI v OQ LCRO 225/2011 (8 March 2013) [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...at review, but is included to raise awareness about concerns that are expressed in the course of the review. [13] In seeking a review of the Standards Committee’s decision, the Applicant made lengthy submissions, which largely amounted to a restatement of his initial complaints. A copy of the original complaint was also included. The review application included some criticisms of the Practitioner that had not been included in his original complaints. [14] The Applicant was par...

3. Musese v Min [2013] NZIACDT 24 (04 April 2013) [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...email to the Authority dated 7 December 2011. In this email he said Global Visas had been reviewing its processes, accepted there were errors, and had made a full refund of fees paid by Mr Musese. [20] On 9 December 2011 Mr Min provided his own statement. The key features were as follows: [20.1] The file came to Mr Min after an expression of interest and work visa had been lodged by Global Visas South African office. [20.2] Mr Min was assigned this file along with 10 other New Zealan...

4. LCRO 195/2014 MC v GK (28 May 2018) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...Mr MC rendered four bills of costs. In each case the fee invoiced amounted to twice the value of time recorded. At the review hearing, Mr MC said this was not the manner in which he had calculated the fee. The inference to be drawn from this statement is that it was a coincidence that the fee charged amounted to twice the value of time recorded. That inference is somewhat difficult to accept. [20] However, the formula applied by the Committee by applying an uplift of 15 per cen...

5. [2018] NZEnvC 100 Auckland Council v London Pacific Family Trust [pdf, 366 KB]

   ...Consulting Engineers & Surveyors Ltd v Auckland Council [2013] NZHC 2468. 8 • indemnity costs, which are within the court's jurisdiction to award but which are awarded only rarely, in exceptional circumstances. [27] The s274 parties claim the presence of Bielby factors and seek a higher than usual costs award. The respondent appears to seek full costs from the Council although the amount sought is only an estimate. Are costs justified? [28] This case concerned an ap...

6. [2021] NZEmpC 125 McKinlay v Wellington Cosmetic Clinic Ltd [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...employer. 18 For example ss 12 and 131–138 of the Companies Act 1993. [37] The case involved the orthodox application of employment law principles. The circumstances were not so unusual as to require non-publication orders. [38] In its statement of defence, WCCL pleaded that it would not, in any event, now have any objection to its name being published. The inference was that Dr Jones’ name, however, should be protected. However, as Mr McKenzie-Bridle submitted,...

7. Wellington Standards Committee 1 v Mr V [2023] NZLCDT 6 (21 March 2023) [pdf, 144 KB]

   ...intended that one, of all the invoices under scrutiny, be paid for services rendered by him and that his son would in effect receive the benefit of his 8 work as represented in the subdivision invoices. Having regard to Mr V’s oft repeated statements that he was not a competent user of technology, and had recourse to the invoice precedent available to him on his system at home, namely the firm’s invoice, we do not consider that his failings can be said to have reached th...

8. Reti v Smith - Part Lot 7 Deposited Plan 3351 - Petane Marae (2024) 109 Tākitimu MB 1 (109 TKT 1) [pdf, 281 KB]

   ...raised various issues concerning Petane Marae. It was accompanied by an interim injunction application, which was determined on 13 July 2023. On 6 November 2023, I issued directions for the applicants to better particularise their substantive claims. Lists of issues were filed on 15 and 16 November 2023. [7] The review application was then heard on 5 December 2024.4 For the reasons set out in the transcript of that hearing, I agreed to undertake a review and set down the followi...

9. LCRO 106/2014 TY v DH [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...put before the Standards Committee. A Review Officer cannot consider fresh complaints which have been raised at the review stage. [90] Mr TY made complaint that Mr DH had, in submissions filed with this Office, made intemperate and inappropriate statements about Mr TY which were damaging to Mr TY’s reputation. [91] I have carefully read the written communications between Mr TY and Mr DH both those which took place at the review stage of the proceedings, and those which form par...

10. LD Trust v CN LCRO 300/2013 (29 November 2016) [pdf, 236 KB]

    ...direction. The Community Council says the strategic direction is consistent with the philosophy of the trust deed, but the Board of Trustees’s changes and proposals are not. [43] Mr CN is said to have been disentitled from advising “the people claiming to be the community council” because he had previously acted for the Board of Trustees.7 Mr CN’s Response [44] Mr CN confirms that his firm was instructed by BL Trust “pertaining to issues relating to changes of the Tru...