Search Results

1. [2021] NZREADT 8 - Complaints Assessment Committee 2001 v Sheldon (19 February 2021) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...prospective purchasers as to the complainants’ price expectations, in breach of rr 9.1 and 9.4 of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012 (“the Rules”); and [b] misled the complainants by providing false information regarding a prospective purchaser’s comments on the value of the property, in breach of r 6.4 of the Rules. [2] Mr Sheldon admits that he sent a text to prospective purchasers inviting expressions of interest in the propert...

2. Juror Satisfaction Survey 2019 Results Report [pdf, 998 KB]

   ...rooms .................................................................................... 7 Food and beverage facilities ........................................................................................... 8 Jurors’ satisfaction with the information provided .............................................................. 8 Information prior to arriving at court ................................................................................ 8 Information about whether jurors ar...

3. CAC 20003 v Weldrand [2013] NZREADT 78 [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...of the licensee to conduct real estate agency work, and is the conduct a marked or serious departure from the standards of an agent of good standing or of a reasonable member of the public? To quite some extent both criteria are interlinked.” Application to Current Case [38] It was put for the prosecution that the licensee’s conduct plainly took place in the context of his work as a licensee in a general sense; and that the relationship between the licensee and the complainant, su...

4. [2021] NZACC 159 – Hawkins v ACC (12 October 2021) [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...February 2020. [4] The appellant took the matter to review and in a decision dated 21 September 2020, the Reviewer decided ACC’s decision of 20 December 2018 determined that Mrs Hawkins’ level of weekly compensation was correct, accordingly the application for review was dismissed. The Appellant’s Submissions [5] Mr Miller acknowledges that the sole issue on appeal is whether the Corporation’s s 15(3) assessment of the minimum full-time earners rate represents “reaso...

5. Steven v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 405) & Ors [2017] NZREADT 13 [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...gym. The noise particularly affected units on Levels 1 and 2 of the complex. The gym owners attempted to mitigate the noise but those attempts were unsuccessful. [7] On 18 December 2012, the Tenancy Tribunal made an interim order, on the application of the complex’s Body Corporate, that: Between the hours of 11.30 pm to 5.30 am, 24/7 Fitness Howick Limited are to prevent within two working days from the date of this order, the use of straight bars and dumbells at the gym unt...

6. Harvey v CAC 10063 & Kelsall [2012] NZREADT 21 [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...individual’s property and her dealings with that property can, in our view, be ‘personal’ information in relation to which the principles in the ‘Professional Conduct and Client Care Rules’ (refer para. 3.2 & 3.3) and the Privacy Act are applicable. 4.4 More specifically, the content of the article itself included material on price and the history of the attempts to sell the property that were, we conclude, confidential, went beyond anything publicly accessible and the...

7. [2024] NZREADT 12 – CAC 2106 v City Realty (24 April 2024) [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...company pay a fine not exceeding $30,000: (g) where it appears to the Tribunal that any person has suffered loss by reason of the licensee’s misconduct and the order is one that a court of competent jurisdiction could make in relation to a similar claim in accordance with principles of law, an order that the licensee pay to that person a sum by way of compensation as is specified in the order, being a sum not exceeding $100,000. [16] In determining the appropriate penalty, it is rel...

8. [2023] NZREADT 13 - CAC v Sun (9 June 2023) [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...m2. [14] Prior to settlement, one of the purchasers, [Purchaser], raised concerns with Ms Sun and [Property developer] about the size of Lot 1. On or about 15 February 2018, Ms Sun and [Purchaser] were engaged in a conversation on the messaging application [Messaging platform] regarding the size of Lot 1 and the impact on the easement relating to the lot. Ms Sun sent a message to [Purchaser] informing her that [Property developer] was “very frustrated and anxious” and that his �...

9. Auckland Standards Committee v Witehira [2012] NZLCDT 5 [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...his bank. He also applied funds to meet various expenses he had in his practice. There is clear dishonesty in his taking of the client funds. [29] The Tribunal does not accept that this was a single, spur-of-the-moment lapse in judgment as claimed for Mr Witehira. This was a deliberate misappropriation occurring on two separate occasions, followed, in the case of the first amount misappropriated, by a number of separate acts involving further application of those funds; (a) t...

10. Research on the effectiveness of police practice in reducing residential burglary part 2: 2002 to 2004 [pdf, 537 KB]

    ...burglaries mentioned one or more of four reasons for reporting the burglary: • to help catch or punish the offender • to fulfil a general sense of obligation as a crime had been committed • to get their property back • to further an insurance claim. ‘Helping to catch or punish offenders’ was mentioned more often in 2004 than in 2002. Burglary victims’ level of satisfaction with the Police did not change significantly between 2002 and 2004 in any area. In both years, victims...