Search Results

1. People charged and convicted of harmful digital communication offences December 2019 [xlsx, 642 KB]

   ...calendar year. The court of their most serious harmful digital communications offence is counted. For more information on how to interpret these figures, please read the definitions and data notes Back to contents page Example interpretation: In 2019, 101 people were charged with Harmful Digital Communications Act offences. The majority of these people (60%; 61 people) were convicted. Number of people charged Percentage of total Charge outcome 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2015 2016 20...

2. Tana v Mahanga - Pukahakaha East 5B (2022) 254 Taitokerau MB 174 (254 TTK 174) [pdf, 310 KB]

   ...first to establish the validity of it before the Court will take any further steps. [100] I do not intend to allow applications to be used as fishing expeditions in this Court or for unwarranted, frivolous or vexatious applications to be made. [101] I also note that Mr Beaumont has suggested that the failure to comply with timetabling orders is an “inconsequential matter”23. This is an extremely unwise submission. I take the obligation to comply with my timetabling orders very...

3. Satnam Singh v Shane Singh and Scorpion Liquor [2015] NZHRRT 8 [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...of the Sikh faith. He explained there are five Sikh symbols, commonly known as the Five Ks. These are the five items of dress and physical appearance which give Sikhs a unique identity signifying discipline and spirituality. The symbols are: [10.1] Kesh, uncut hair which is kept covered by a turban. [10.2] Kirpan, a ceremonial sword or dagger, symbolising readiness to protect the weak and to defend against injustice and persecution. [10.3] Kara, a steel bracelet symbolising strengt...

4. [2015] NZEnvC 105 Opoutere Ratepayers and Residents' Association v Waikato Regional Council [pdf, 2.2 MB]

   ...caunot provide protection through rules because of section 62(1)( e) of the Act, By way of comparison a regional plan may include rules in accordance with section 68 of the Act, and a district plan must include rules pursuant to section 75(1)(c). [101] Mr Lloyd's argument was that the inclusion of the comma III the introduction to Policy 7 after the words regional policy statements and before the ORRA (Decision) Combined 34 words and plans means that the identification requ...

5. [2014] NZEmpC 99 Robinson v Pacific Seals Ltd [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...the building, drove through the glass frontage, through a counter and a partition wall and finally came to rest at a concrete wall near 1 Robinson v Pacific Seals (NZ) Ltd [2013] NZERA Wellington 101 [Authority determination]. 2 At [86]. 3 Robinson v Pacific Seals New Zealand Ltd WRC20/13, 6 December 2013. Mr Robinson’s desk. He sustained significant injuries to his legs as a result of the accident. The motorist also s...

6. Auckland Standards Committee v Castles [2013] NZLCDT 53 [pdf, 277 KB]

   ...the drafters failed to correct an error in the pleadings (which was an oddly expressed clause). They also did not pick up a Court of Appeal decision directly on point and delivered one week before the filing of this document. 23 [101] The costs revisors were highly critical of this process which involved 12 drafts of the fifth amended statement of claim. It was said by both Mr Castles and Mr Tapsell to be a strategy to be used to deflect the strike out application by th...

7. LCRO 131/2022 GN, YL and EK v FQ (30 June 2023) [pdf, 212 KB]

   ...traversed in circumstances where a lawyer has been appointed as lawyer for the child. [100] A number of cases have come before the LCRO where complaint has been made about a lawyer’s conduct in the course of the lawyer acting as lawyer for child. [101] Those cases, to the extent that they involve a consideration at first step as to the appropriate process for proceeding a conduct investigation, are closely analogous to the situation here where complaint is made against counsel for a su...

8. LCRO 80/2019 ZB v YC (18 August 2021) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...consistent with how decision-makers routinely express rejection of one side’s argument in a case. [100] An adversarial process will produce a decision in which one side prevails, meaning that arguments of the other side have not been accepted. [101] That is an entirely different matter from a decision-maker criticising the conduct of a lawyer. Rejection of a lawyer’s arguments does not necessarily mean that the lawyer has acted in an unprofessional or unethical way. [102] I d...

9. Director of Proceedings v The Ultimate Care Group Ltd [2022] NZHRRT 17 [pdf, 1.1 MB]

   ...underwent a certification audit in 2017, and a surveillance audit in 2019. The defendant reports these audits found no evidence of the recurring issues found in 2016, which are the subject of this agreed summary of facts. BREACH OF THE CODE 101. Right 4(1) of the Code states: “Every consumer has the right to have services provided with reasonable care and skill”. 102. The defendant had a duty to provide the aggrieved person services with reasonable care and skill, and was...

10. LCRO 73/2019 LM v NO (27 July 2020) [pdf, 224 KB]

    ...Deed proceedings, he “hadn’t resolved whether to act” in those proceedings. But he acknowledged a “hypothetical” retainer. [100] It is, as I have said above, inconceivable that Mr NO could have acted for S against PQ, at any stage. [101] If Mr NO could not have acted for S in the Deed proceedings themselves, how could he have given him advice about those proceedings which included advising him to name PQ – his other client – as a defendant? [102] In my view it matte...