Search Results

1. MSC v Scholes [2013] NZIACDT 71 (25 November 2013) [pdf, 167 KB]

   ...section 51(1)(g) is expressed widely as covering “all or any of the costs or expenses of the investigation, inquiry, or hearing”. The jurisdiction also covers the costs of any related prosecution, though that does not arise in the present case. [101] The Registrar suggested this was more limited than the jurisdiction under the Law Practitioner’s Act. It is difficult to see any reason for that. They are both expressed as wide permissive powers, no doubt constrained by the well-known...

2. Nixon v Attorney-General [2018] NZHRRT 9 [pdf, 301 KB]

   ...that, in general, an act or omission that is inconsistent with the right to freedom from discrimination affirmed by s 19 of BORA, is in breach of Part 1A if the act or omission is that of a person or body referred to in s 3 of BORA, namely: 4 [10.1] The legislative, executive, or judicial branch of the Government of New Zealand; or [10.2] A person or body in the performance of any public function, power, or duty conferred or imposed on that person or body by or pursuant to law...

3. [2017] NZEnvC 190 Hood v Dunedin City Council [pdf, 4.6 MB]

   ...requiring natural hazard risk reduction. He points out that the RPS identifies the site as 32 33 Evidence of Melissa Shipman for the respondent, dated 2 June 2017, at [39]. Evidence of Conrad Anderson for the appellants, dated 16 June 2017, at [97]-[101J, [115]. ( ( 13 being in a 'Level 3' flood hazard area, being an area subject to short term surface flooding but having a low risk to people and property.34 [43] Ms Hood produces photographs showing "the exten...

4. LCRO 233/2014 IB v KZ (27 June 2018) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...detachment that must at all times inform their instructions to their client. [100] Having concluded that the comment was unsatisfactory, I turn my attention to the question as to whether the comment was deserving of a disciplinary response. [101] I am mindful that Standards Committees are made up of experienced practitioners and lay persons, who bring a considered and careful approach to determining complaints. Having found myself in agreement with the Committee’s conclusion...

5. LCRO 276/2013+293/2013+242/2016 CS v VN, PR and ZW ZM v VC [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...of the misconduct and culpability of the practitioner, with the various mitigating and aggravating features being taken into account when fixing penalty. Acknowledgement of error and acceptance of responsibility are matters for mitigation. [101] It is a serious matter for a lawyer to breach a duty owed to the court in litigation. However, Mr CS responsibly accepted at the review hearing that the criticisms levelled against him by the complainants were at least in part a consequen...

6. LCRO 116/2015 QO v Standards Committee (14 June 2018) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...description is more likely to be accurate than Mrs MN’s. While Mrs MN should have had no information that was confidential to any of Ms QO’s other clients, the scale of the disclosure was not as large as the Committee’s decision records. [101] After Mrs MN’s revelation, three key points stand out. Ms QO: (a) did not know for a fact that Mrs MN had any confidential information; (b) did not ignore the risk, and endeavoured to negotiate an acceptable outcome with Mrs MN o...

7. [2023] NZEmpC 105 Pilgrim & Ors v Attorney-General & Ors [pdf, 596 KB]

   ...young women in the leaver statistics for young people. He fairly acknowledged the sort of impediments that they may face in considering leaving the Community, and its way of life, and noted that he is committed to making a positive change. [101] The situation that the plaintiffs found themselves in has some parallels with the sort of cultural dynamics not infrequently seen by this Court in migrant worker cases, where the employer (sometimes a migrant worker themselves) exploits (w...

8. Friesen v Accident Compensation Corporation (Personal Injury) [2024] NZACC 46 [pdf, 449 KB]

   ...none other than total knee replacement. [100] I find in this case therefore that on the balance of probabilities the consequences of the meniscal tear caused by this accident went beyond rendering his underlying osteoarthritis symptomatic. [101] If the Respondent’s position were accepted in its entirety, it would mean the appellant would be denied cover and treatment for an injury by accident, namely the torn meniscus. Such an approach would not be consistent with the generous a...

9. [2016] NZEmpC 20 Roy v Board of Trustees of Tamaki College [pdf, 522 KB]

   ...………………………………………………….. A meeting with the Board and a resolution ………………………………… The resolution of the dispute in practice …………………………………… [43] [53] [69] [77] [92] [101] [113] [124] Good faith obligations in employment …………………………………………….. [164] Setting aside the agreement ……………………………………………………....... [167] D...

10. Brown v Accident Compensation Corporation (Cover Issues) [2023] NZACC 23 [pdf, 280 KB]

    ...position. These were each responded to by Mr Hodgson in his response dated 28 June 2019. [100] I note that the panel said: The client had mechanical back pain but no radicular or sciatic symptoms, in keeping with an acute protrusion. [101] This is at odds with the note from the St John officer, who recorded some pins and needles down left leg; this fact also being recorded in the emergency department nursing assessment. [102] It seems that the two opposing positions are ca...