116 items matching your search terms
...Hearing: by memoranda of submissions filed on 20 February, 17 and 31 March, 16, 22 and 28 April and 1, 8, 12 and 15 May, 2 and 12 June 2015 Appearances: A Lloyd, counsel for Premier Events Group Limited J Eichelbaum, counsel for Malcolm James Beattie, Anthony Joseph Regan and Patricia Panapa D Neutze, counsel for BA Partners Limited (in liquidation and receivership) Judgment: 24 June 2015 INTERIM COSTS JUDGMENT OF CHIEF J
...April, 1-4, 7-11 and 14-15 May 2012 (Heard at Auckland) Counsel: Aaron Lloyd and Vonda Hodgson, counsel for Premier Events Group Limited David Neutze and Natalie Lord, counsel for BA Partners Limited (in liquidation and receivership) John Eichelbaum, counsel for Malcolm James Beattie, Anthony Joseph Regan and Patricia Panapa Judgment: 15 May 2012 ORAL INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT NO 5 OF CHIEF JUDGE G L COLGAN [1] After all three parties (and, in that respect...
...behaviour more serious than his. [26] Of the decisions referred to us, that which most closely reflects the conduct under consideration is that of Orlov9 [27] A more recent decision, which has a number of similarities to the present, is that of Eichelbaum. . In Mr Orlov’s case it was speech directed against a Judge, which we regard as much more serious than Mr Hong’s offending. Mr Orlov’s conduct was also sustained and yet Their Honours considered that, having regard to...
...[7] Mr Beck submitted it was speculative to conclude that, even if more forcefully managed, that the Fs would have been dissuaded from litigation, or would not have suffered a similar outcome. [8] Mr Beck relied strongly on the recent decision of Eichelbaum1 to submit that suspension was not an automatic consequence of the negligence finding. In that case, despite two findings of misconduct and one of unsatisfactory conduct, the practitioner was not suspended. Mr Beck also referre...
...Secondly, it is relevant to record that the appellant, Ms Rahim, has the responsibility of persuading the Tribunal that the Committee was wrong to decide to take no further action on her complaint. [19] As the Tribunal said in its decision in Eichelbaum v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 303),3 appeal hearings generally proceed on the record of the material that was before the Complaints Assessment Committee and the submissions of the parties. The Tribunal may accept further evi...
...First Defendant AND ANTHONY JOSEPH REGAN Second Defendant AND PATRICIA PANAPA Third Defendant Hearing: 23 March 2012 (in Chambers) (Heard at Auckland) Counsel: Aaron Lloyd and Vonda Hodgson, counsel for plaintiffs John Eichelbaum, counsel for defendants Judgment: 23 March 2012 INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT NO 2 OF CHIEF JUDGE GL COLGAN [1] There are two matters for decision today in respect of the trial of liability (but not damages) issues between the...
...generally proceed on the record of evidence that the Committee considered and additional evidence is not admitted at the appeal stage. The Court of Appeal in Nottingham v Real Estate Agents Authority confirmed the principles set out by the Tribunal in Eichelbaum v Real Estate Agents Authority2 stating that on appeal, full oral hearings of the evidence are only appropriate in “exceptional circumstances”3. But the Tribunal may in appropriate cases exceptionally accept further ev...
...parties, without any new evidence. The Court of Appeal in Nottingham v Real Estate Agents Authority affirmed the 1 Refer email from Dr Simons dated 27.03.19 principles set out by the Tribunal in Eichelbaum v Real Estate Agents Authority, holding that full oral hearings are only appropriate in “exceptional circumstances”.2 The Tribunal may accept further evidence on appeal if justified. 2. The standard test for admission of...
...while he was asked if he had searched and understood the title, he was not asked a question following up on his response to that question. Relevant legal principles [14] Pursuant to s 113(3) of the Act, and as the Tribunal said in its decision in Eichelbaum v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 303),1 appeal hearings are re- hearings, and generally proceed by reference to the material that was before the Complaints Assessment Committee and the submissions made by or on behalf of the...
...determination of a Complaints Assessment Committee is by way of re-hearing. That is, the Tribunal hears submissions by or on behalf of the parties, and reconsiders the evidence and other material that was provided to the Committee. In its decision in Eichelbaum v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 303), the Tribunal accepted that most appeals will be conducted on the record which was before the Committee, but that the Tribunal may allow witnesses to be cross-examined on their evide...