Search Results

1. LCRO 8/2022 QQ v LW (8 October 2024) [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...Mr QQ is in breach of r 10.2. [119] The next question to address is whether a finding of unsatisfactory conduct is the necessary consequence of the breach. Unsatisfactory conduct [120] In Ragg v Legal Complaints Review Officer,46 the Court of Appeal said: [40] When assessing the case against Mr Ragg it was necessary for the Review Officer to consider whether protection of the interests of the community and the profession justified taking the formal step of making a finding that Mr R...

2. LCRO 61/2022 YJ v GQ (29 October 2024) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...he/[Law Firm 1] breached any professional duties and obligations to Ms YJ. Nature and scope of review [58] The High Court has described a review by this Office in the following way:27 A review by the LCRO is neither a judicial review nor an appeal. Those seeking a review of a Committee determination are entitled to a review based on the LCRO’s own opinion rather than on deference to the view of the Committee. A review by the LCRO is informal, inquisitorial and robust. It involv...

3. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Woodroffe [2025] NZLCDT 1 (7 January 2025) [pdf, 258 KB]

   ...[11] Mrs Woodroffe’s letter to her client on 3 June 20157 states (among other things): “Should the matter proceed to a Court, we will need a deposit of $50,000NZ for legal work. There will be more costs if the matter continues to a Court of Appeal.” A receipt dated 22 December 2015 shows that $30,000 was paid as “a further deposit for a Court matter in Samoa.”8 [12] No written record we have seen suggests any advice about security for costs until after the 8 October 2019...

4. LCRO 12/2025 AO v FA and CY (28 February 2025) [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...2013) at [4]. 6 For an example of a provision in an enactment empowering a judge to extend a time limit, see s 281(1)(a)(ii) of the Resource Management Act 1991. In short, in proceedings under that enactment a judge may waive the time within which an appeal may be lodged. 5 Meaning of “working day” [23] Section 13 of the Legislation Act 2019 (LA) relevantly defines “working day” as follows: “[W]orking day means a day of a week other than … a day in the period commenc...

5. [2025] NZEmpC 34  Xu v Pioneer Education and Immigration Services Group Ltd [pdf, 313 KB]

   ...remuneration or three months’ lost wages, whichever is lesser. However, the Authority and Court may exercise a discretion to order an employer to pay more than three months’ lost remuneration where a greater sum has been lost.12 [55] The Court of Appeal in Sam’s Fukuyama Food Services Ltd v Zhang set out a number of relevant principles guiding the exercise of that discretion, including:13 (a) A full assessment of financial loss sets the upper limit on an award of compensa...

6. [2025] NZREADT 08 - OQ v Knowles & Maclean (21 March 2025) [pdf, 327 KB]

   ...[105] Pursuant to s 110A of the Act, the parties are to file any submissions as to costs within 14 days of the date of this decision. [106] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116, setting out the right of appeal to the High Court. PUBLICATION [107] Having regard to the interests of the public, it is appropriate to order publication of this decision without identifying the complainant, but naming the licensees and the agency.14 __...

7. [2025] NZLCDT 2 Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Wintour (9 January 2025) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...orders prohibiting the publication of the practitioner’s name and details that might identify him beyond the fact that he is a criminal barrister based in Auckland. That extends through to the end of any period within which the practitioner could appeal this decision or the subsequent penalty decision. We note that News Media wish to be heard should any application be made for permanent non-publication of the practitioner’s name. [50] We record again earlier permanent non-pu...

8. LCRO 23/2023 VT v NH (18 March 2025) [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...2025, attended by Mrs QE and her husband, and Mr VT, represented by Mr WK. Nature and scope of review [69] The High Court has described a review by this Office in the following way:29 A review by the LCRO is neither a judicial review nor an appeal. Those seeking a review of a Committee determination are entitled to a review based on the LCRO’s own opinion rather than on deference to the view of the Committee. A review by the LCRO is informal, inquisitorial and robust. It involv...

9. Andrew Hill - Evidence in Chief [pdf, 4.3 MB]

   IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND ENV-2015-134 IN THE MATTER OF Of the Resource Management Act 1991 and of an appeal under Clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Act and an application under section 311 of the Act BETWEEN MOTITI ROHE MOANA TRUST AND Appellant BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent BRIEF OF EVIDENCE OF ANDREW FRANCIS HILL November 2017 CROWNLAW TE TARI 'fuRE O TE KARA.UNA PO Box 2858 WELLINGTON 6140 Tel: 044721719 Fax: 04 473 3482 Contac...

10. Proactive Release - Amendments to the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 [pdf, 2.7 MB]

    ...right to natural justice includes the right to a fair hearing 47 The existing CPRA processes provide opportunities for respondents (and others with an interest in the property) to present evidence at hearings for restraint and forfeiture, and to make appeals against any orders made by the courts. 48 The right to a fair hearing is further protected by: 48.1 Residual judicial discretion to decline to make the presumption where it is not in the interests of justice to do so, to ensure orde...