Search Results

1. LCRO 111/2021 New Zealand Law Society v AP (10 January 2022) [pdf, 349 KB]

   ...letter, in a letter to the Complaints Service dated 20 January 2021. [36] To avoid making what will be a relatively lengthy decision any more so, I will briefly summarise Mr AP’s submissions. In doing so, I mean him no disrespect. I have very carefully read those submissions. [37] However, because the facts are largely undisputed, and occurred over relatively short periods of time, detailed repetition is unnecessary for these purposes. 9 [38] Mr AP made the following points:...

2. Wiezoreck v McHugh [2013] NZIACDT 35 (4 June 2013) [pdf, 240 KB]

   ...professional service he had paid for, and incurred further unnecessary costs of $530 (translations), and NZQA fees of $477. [23] Ms Susan Atherton, who is not a licensed immigration adviser and is presented by Oceania as working in its “Client Care & Compliance Department”, responded to the complaint regarding Ms McHugh’s professional conduct. The letter essentially disclaimed responsibility for the advice given. The letter emphasised the need for further investigation of ent...

3. LCRO 24/2023 RD v KE and PS (5 September 2023) [pdf, 329 KB]

   ...the Standards Committee and this Office has been a single, one-paragraph letter in which she stated: Whilst my involvement with [Law firm] was in the capacity of staff solicitor I fully recall that WD assisted her father in all matters as she was caring for him and in the course of my work I met, during appointments they had with VB, both WD and her father on numerous occasions. The Standards Committee’s inquiry [53] In December 2021, the Committee issued an order for production o...

4. [2022] NZEnvC 236 Ngāti Tūpoho v Manawatū-Whanganui Regional Council [pdf, 1.4 MB]

   ...principles associated with Te Mana o Te Wai as drawn from the NPS-FM 2020. The relevant Te Mana o Te Wai principles are as follows: (a) Mana whakahaere: the power, authority, and obligations of tangata whenua to make decisions that maintain, protect, and sustain the health and well- being of, and their relationship with, freshwater. (b) Kaitiakitanga: the obligation of tangata whenua to preserve, restore, enhance, and sustainably use freshwater for the benefit of present and future g...

5. [2021] NZREADT 40 – Beath (29 July 2021) [pdf, 389 KB]

   ...erroneous understanding that the concerns about the party wall related to a “potential or possible risk” because it had not been assessed directly by an engineer, and therefore did not need to be disclosed, and prospective purchasers would be protected by a recommendation that they seek their own building report. They accepted that this was a fundamental error. [31] The Tribunal found that the licensees failed to comply with their obligations in two key respects: they relied on...

6. [2017] NZEnvC 150 Blueskin Energy Ltd v Dunedin City Council [pdf, 11 MB]

   ...approval are R C Ireland, C S Ireland, D and C Robertson and E Dowden. 16 Irving, opening submissions at [22]. 17 See s 104(2) RMA. 7 with the relevant rules. 18 The City Council's decision [18] As required under s 290A of the Act we have carefully considered the decision which is the subject of the appeal. While all parties prayed in aid of its findings, given the amendments made to the application we were not materially assisted by the decision. Structure of the deci...

7. Electoral-Maori-Electoral-OptionFINAL.pdf [pdf, 7 MB]

   ...agreement to engage with Māori on the timing and frequency of the Māori Electoral Option. Relation to government priorities 2 This paper reflects the Government’s commitment to working to honour te Tiriti o Waitangi / the Treaty of Waitangi and to protect the integrity of New Zealand elections, and voters’ access to the polls. Executive summary 3 The Māori Electoral Option is a four-month period within which Māori voters can elect to exercise their option to move between general...

8. Green v EIT [2020] NZHRRT 24 [pdf, 985 KB]

   ...5. I will contact Cheri Gillett-Jackson, Disability Liaison on [telephone number and extension redacted] if there is a problem of any kind (if sessions are not helpful or if assistance is no longer needed). [Emphasis in original] [37] The need to protect the personal information of disability students in general and of Jeremy in particular is illustrated by the account given by Ms Gillett-Jackson herself of her interview with Jeremy and Mrs Green when they attended her office during the...

9. L v EQC [2021] CEIT-2019-0036 [pdf, 298 KB]

   ...cover. As a result of the removal of EQC and Tower the claim made by Ms L and Mr M is at an end. Background [6] On 21 September 2010, Tower began insuring Mr M and Ms L’s house at XXXX XXXX (the House) under a “Provider House Policy Maxi Protection” (the Policy). [7] The house was apparently damaged in the earthquakes of 4 September 2010, 2 February 2011, and 23 December 2011. In 2010 and 2011 claims for $12,878.85 were made to the EQC for emergency repairs to damage fro...

10. Auckland Standards Committee v Banbrook [2014] NZLCDT 37 [pdf, 104 KB]

    ...purposes of a disciplinary hearing the Tribunal could certainly consider context, as established by the practitioner and have regard to any mitigating factors. However, Mr Hodge pointed out that the Summary of Facts was a lengthy, detailed, and careful document agreed after lengthy negotiation between the prosecuting authority and the practitioner at a time when he was being represented by a Queens Counsel. 6 Banbrook v The Queen...