Search Results

1. [2023] NZEnvC 170 Liquigas Limited v Dunedin City Council [pdf, 3.4 MB]

   ...or weight of a hazardous substance is affected by the temperature and pressure at which it is stored, the volume or weight will be considered (for the purposes of the hazardous substance quantity limits) to be that present in conditions of 20QC and 101.3kPa. 4. The permitted quantity tl=iresl=iolels limits apply per site. {References to GHS classification system added through c/.16 of the first schedule of the RMAl Table AG.1.1 Class 1 - Explosives (GHS unstable explosive) Substan...

2. LCRO 10/2018 DO v ABC & Body Corporate (30 August 2019) [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...educational instead of punitive outcomes. [100] Given what I have made of the case, I conclude that this is one of those unusual cases where, despite the breach of a conduct rule, a finding of unsatisfactory conduct is not warranted. Decision [101] Pursuant to s 211(1)(a) and (b) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 the decision of the Standards Committee is reversed and a finding that no further action is either necessary or appropriate is substituted. [102] It follows th...

3. LCRO 183/2021 WB v XD (22 July 2022) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...XD’s response to this aspect of Mr WB’s complaint would have been best met not just with an acknowledgement that his communications could have been better, but with apology for failure to be as attentive to responding as he could have been. [101] In considering this issue, I am not however persuaded that the evidence to support complaint that Mr XD failed to communicate with his client is sufficiently extensive to merit the imposition of a disciplinary sanction. [102] Not every...

4. LCRO 25/2024 PG v WA (29 May 2024) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...instance. (g) What professional duties, if any, did the respondent owe to the applicant? [71] A lawyer owes limited professional duties to someone who is not his or her client. In this instance, the respondent owed a duty to the applicant under r 10.1 of the Rules, which provides as follows: A lawyer must, when acting in a professional capacity, treat all persons with respect and courtesy. (h) Did the respondent breach any such professional duty? [72] It is not appropriate for m...

5. [2021] NZEnvC 191 Kapiti Coast District Council [pdf, 919 KB]

   ...used b~ the public. CHURCHES1 CINEMAS1 HALLS1 CONFERENCE FACILITIES1 FUNERAL HOMES1 CREMATORIUMS AND ENTERTAINMENT ACTIVITIES Churches1 30m2 - 18-60 cinemas1 hall1 100m2: seats/ conference 1 space patrons: facilities1 1 space funeral homes1 101m2 - crematoriums 1000m2: 61-600 and 2 spaces seats/ entertainment patrons: activities Plus 1 2 spaces additional Measurement space for Plus 1 criteria: every additional ·. additional space for 1. measured b~ 500m21 or every eith...

6. NZCVS topical report Cycle 1 (2018) - Important findings [pdf, 1.3 MB]

   ...Forced intercourse Sexual touches Any of the above 17 Attitudes towards the sex of the victim was perceived as the most frequent offence driver (14% of all incidents, 19% of personal offences and 30% for interpersonal violence). Fig. 10.1: Offences perceived as driven by discrimination 11. Less than a quarter of all crime was reported to the Police Overall, it is estimated that only 23% of crimes were reported to the Police. This proportion is twice as high for h...

7. [2021] NZEmpC 215 Stewart v AFFCO NZ Ltd [pdf, 318 KB]

   ...over various issues, including as to the correct application of provisions under the HA, and that these remain to be determined by the Authority, I have no basis for concluding that he was locked out on 5 July 2021 because of these claims. [101] In the result, I am satisfied Mr Stewart was unlawfully locked out. Issue two: circumstances if Mr Stewart had been on a fixed-term contract [102] The second issue raised by the parties’ submissions related to the potential applicat...

8. LCRO 216/2018 AA v BB (28 November 2019) [pdf, 165 KB]

   ...would not need to be replicated by counsel taking over the file. [99] Ms BB said she was instructed by Mr AA to pass the file over to Mr DD. [100] She says that she took care to ensure that the file was carefully prepared for Mr DD. 17 [101] It is argued for Ms BB that she was able to decline to act on matters relating to the charging order, as the work engaged in defending the charging order constituted new instructions which Ms BB was entitled to refuse to accept under r 4.1...

9. LCRO 208/2021 PK v GH (13 June 2023) [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...consulted by Mr WC about insurance obligations and Mr PK had provided him with the same advice that he was giving to Mrs GH. On that basis therefore, the interests of Mrs GH and Mr WC coincided, and it does not amount to a conflict of interests. [101] In this regard, I concur with the determination of the Committee to take no further action. Other complaints [102] As noted above at [70] the Committee has not addressed Mrs GH’s complaints that Mr PK was discourteous and ha...

10. LCRO 104/2018 CJ v MV (28 February 2020) [pdf, 189 KB]

    ...was necessary, advised Mr CJ accordingly, and moved on to other things. [100] Once he became aware the notice had not reached the register, Mr MV did the right things, including apologising to Mr CJ, who seemed to accept it at the time. [101] Mr MV also explained what he had done to minimise the chance of a recurrence. I consider it unlikely Mr MV, or anyone under his supervision, will make the same mistake again. [102] Nonetheless, Mr MV’s conduct fell below a proper sta...