4708 items matching your search terms
...release this 2 Richmond Services Ltd v Bracewell [2013] NZERA Auckland 481. 3 Bracewell v Richmond Services Ltd [2014] NZCA 629. information, it would do so since it was necessary to protect Client A from further abuse of her privacy. This step would be taken pursuant to r 11(2)(h)(i) of the Health Information Privacy Code 1994. As a result, I directed the Bay of Plenty DHB to file an affidavit from a person who had kno...
...conditions to HNZPT, a delegation accepted by HNZPT. TWCL supports this and encourages SECT also to delegate its enforcement role . As TWCL recognises the Court cannot order that SECT delegate its enforcement role as given that SECT remains the Heritage Protection Authority. However, we are mindful that the conditions do need to be enforceable and we are minded not to stand in the way of possible future delegation to HNZPT should that body agree. 21WCL memorandum 2 March 2018 at [6]...
...charged significant fees for her attendances, without having been authorised by the Court, and in respect of some attendances which could not have been authorised by the Court. Additionally, she advanced $20,000 as a loan to a family member of the protected person, without any authority to do so. Issues 1. What are the applicable principles of penalty in relation to this matter? 2. What is the level of culpability of the practitioner on the continuum of negligent conduct? 3. Ar...
...the fact that the conduct occurred 12 to 14 years ago. Both the complainant and the respondent have moved on and achieved significantly in their respective careers and lives. [3] In a jurisdiction that is not supposed to be punitive but rather protective, the fixing of proportionate penalty involves many factors but must also be carried out with the purposes of the LCA1 in mind. Process to be followed [4] The starting point is: 1. To ascertain the seriousness of the miscond...
...been changed. The Respondent’s name has not been amended. Decision on orders [1] In a decision of 9 December 2009 it was found that certain conduct of Mr Khan contravened r 6.1 (including its sub rules) of the Rules of Conduct and Client Care and is therefore unsatisfactory conduct pursuant to s 12(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006. It is not necessary to traverse the incidents of that breach which are set out in my earlier decision. [2] Ms Sandy was invited to pr...
...Wai 1. The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (NPSFM) sets out at 1.31 its fundamental concept – Te Mana o te Wai: (1) Te Mana o te Wai is a concept that refers to the fundamental importance of water and recognises that protecting the health of freshwater protects the health and wellbeing of the wider environment. It protects the mauri of the wai. Te Mana o te Wai is about restoring and preserving the balance between the water, the wider environment, and the co...
...reached at that meeting, and the parties executed a written relationship property agreement, appropriately certified by their lawyers (the agreement).1 [9] Mr FB subsequently became unhappy about the agreement. He considered that Mr LK had failed to protect his interests in the negotiations leading up to the agreement being signed, and that the agreement unjustly favoured Mrs FB. Complaint [10] Against that background, on 18 February 2020, Mr FB lodged his complaint with the New...
...COUNSEL Ms N Pender and Ms N Town for the Standards Committee Mr G Paine for the Respondent Practitioner 2 DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL ON PENALTY Opportunity squandered [1] In November of 2014, after lengthy and careful consideration, the Practice Approval Committee (PAC) of the New Zealand Law Society granted Mr O’Connor a certificate of character so that he could be entered on the roll of barristers and solicitors of the High Court of New Zealand....
...settled the purchase. [16] Mr Burn says that it was not until 21 March 2011 that he was aware that there was no permit for the deck. He asserts that there should have been a condition in the agreement for sale and purchase prepared by the licensee to protect Mr and Mrs Burn over the deck. Accordingly, he maintains the licensee has been guilty of misconduct or at least unsatisfactory conduct. 5 [17] His stance is that the vendor and the licensee “were fully aware that the...
...No. 105’s gang connection was a matter which, in fairness, ought to have been disclosed to Ms Drummond and that in not disclosing the gang connection Ms Tapu was in breach of r 6.4 of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012 (“the Rules”), pursuant to which a licensee “must not … withhold information that should by law or in fairness be provided to a customer or client”. The gang connection was information that should have been provid...