Search Results

1. BAB v PW LCRO 4 / 2011 (14 August 2012) [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...[1] BAB has lodged an application for review of a determination by Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee to take no further action in respect of a complaint against Mr PW for registering a caveat in breach of Rule 2.3 of the Conduct and Client Care Rules.1 Background [2] On 20 August 2009 Mr PW received instructions from Mr PV to register a caveat against a farm property in [location]. Mr PW had not previously acted for Mr PV, who had until then been represented by BAD in [lo...

2. RV v ZL LCRO 85/2012 (23 May 2016) [pdf, 70 KB]

   ...appropriate for Mr ZL to act for both the vendor and the purchaser in a related party transaction, when the property was allegedly sold at a substantial loss and Mr ZL was aware of the original purchase price. (c) Whether Mr ZL breached any duty of care to Mr RV as a shareholder of [Company A]. [10] The Committee addressed each issue. Conflict of interests [11] The Committee noted that the issue was not so much one of a conflict of interests but whether Mr ZL potentially was in...

3. GK v ZR LCRO 192/2013 (13 December 2016) [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...as a barrister sole; holding money received in advance of providing legal services and an invoice, and not accounting for money received in contravention of rules 9.3 and 14.2(e) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, and failing to comply with the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Trust Account) Regulations 2008, regs 9 and 10, are unsatisfactory conduct pursuant to ss 12(a), (b) and (c) of the Act. (b) Failures to comply with obligations i...

4. BORA Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill [pdf, 320 KB]

   ...carried out or because those areas are hazardous. This purpose is sufficiently important to justify some kind of limitation on the right. There is a rational connection between restricting access to areas, buildings, public places, and roads and protecting the public from the hazards resulting from earthquake damage. 9. In assessing whether the limitation impairs the right no more than is reasonably necessary and is proportionately connected to the purpose, it is important to consider...

5. HE and SD v QXF [2011] NZIACDT 32 (20 September 2011) [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...overcharged, and misrepresented himself as a principal rather than an employee. In addition, that he failed to establish a client relationship in accordance with the Code which governs his profession. [2] The Adviser said he acted ethically and properly to protect his clients in a situation where his employer was failing financially. He accepted he may have made errors in establishing the client relationship but they were not more than oversights. Issues [3] The Tribunal must assess...

6. BORA Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill [pdf, 322 KB]

   ...proposal raises a possible inconsistency with s 17 of the Bill of Rights Act. However, the position is complicated by the uncertain scope of that right in comparable jurisdictions, which do not necessarily recognise the extension of the right to protect associations of a commercial character. However, in our view the proposal is in any event justifiable under s 5 of the Bill of Rights Act as reflecting a rational and legitimate policy choice by the legislature to re-emphasise the import...

7. KIT v Zhu [2019] NZIACDT 46 sanctions (8 July 2019) [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...2 Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007. 6 [22] In determining the appropriate sanction, it is relevant to note the purpose of the Act: 3 Purpose and scheme of Act The purpose of this Act is to promote and protect the interests of consumers receiving immigration advice, and to enhance the reputation of New Zealand as a migration destination, by providing for the regulation of persons who give immigration advice. [23] The focus of professional dis

8. [2023] NZIACDT 29 - DT v Li (11 December 2023) [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...1 November 2023, the Tribunal found that Ms Li had breached the specified clauses of the Code: (1) Failed to provide the client with an opportunity to review the s 61 requests before lodgement, in breach of cl 1 (obligation of diligence and due care). 1 BT v Li [2023] NZIACDT 27. 3 (2) Failed to indicate to the complainant and/or client whether the second s 61 request was likely to be futile and/or to notify them of such risks, in breach of cl 9(a) and (b) (obligation to...

9. Green v De'Ath [2018] NZIACDT 50 (13 December 2018) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...and the Code of Conduct 2014 (the Code). [4] This misunderstanding occurred because of the tripartite nature of Mr De’Ath’s contractual relationships. Mr De’Ath had contractual relationships with both Mr S (as to immigration and pastoral care matters) and with the Greens (as to recruitment and financial matters). The Tribunal noted at [47] of the decision that Mr S had not signed the “Candidate Terms of Business”, so whether there was in fact any binding written agreem...

10. BORA Corrections Amendment Bill (No 2) [pdf, 325 KB]

    ...security, order and discipline in prisons."[2] This principle lay behind the drafting of the Act and is reflected in the Bill. 5. We have nonetheless identified some features that appear to raise issues of inconsistency with the rights and freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights Act. However, where an issue arises a provision may nevertheless be consistent with the Bill of Rights Act if it can be considered a "reasonable limit" that is "justifiable" in terms of s...