8462 items matching your search terms
LEGAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW OFFICER ĀPIHA AROTAKE AMUAMU Ā-TURE [2020] NZLCRO 184 Ref: LCRO 158/2018 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN YCH Applicant AND TSR Respondent DECISION The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. Introduction [1] Mr Y
...with Mr BV (the then managing director of ZEN) and Ms PQ, a staff solicitor, on 4 February 2019. [9] The discussion at the 4 February meeting first addressed issues relating to the flood insurance claim. Before further steps were taken on that matter, it was agreed that a careful examination of the terms of the commercial lease was required. Discussion on the issue of the flood insurance concluded with Mr JM advising the lawyers that he was experienced in reviewing commercial leas...
...applications. [6] On reflection, Mr HD regretted having withdrawn his applications. Disappointed with Mrs SH’s part in events, in August 2017 Mr HD complained to the firm Mrs SH worked for, [Law Firm] criticising Mrs SH’s handling of his matter. [7] [Law Firm] provided a detailed response dated 8 September 2017. [8] Mr HD was not satisfied and made a complaint to the New Zealand Law Society (NZLS) in September 2017. The complaint and the Standards Committee decision [9] M...
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2021] NZACC 127 ACA 02/18 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION TO RECALL DECISION BETWEEN CRAIG RICHARD JONES Applicant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: On the Papers Appearances: Applicant in person D Tuiqereqere for the respondent Judgment: 11 August 2021 _____________________________...
...and it appears 4 that payment to Ms Morris has already been made for this. Ill arrange for Bhavika to generate and issue a formal decision letter to Ms Morris, in the hopes of preventing any doubt or confusion. If there are no additional matters relevant to this review application, please respond in writing to confirm if youre happy to withdraw review 7981231. Alternatively if you continue to disagree with ACCs decision and you would like to proceed to a formal review hearing...
...comprises both Māori and non-Māori members, who are appointed with regard to ‘the partnership between the 2 parties to Te Tiriti’ as well as to their personal attributes and their ‘knowledge of and experience in the different aspects of the matters likely to come before the Tribunal’.6 At any sitting of the Tribunal, at least one Māori member must be present.7 Tikanga Māori will generally inform the Tribunal’s process in inquiries. Evidence and submissions (both written an...
...Background [1] Following a complaint made by a Mr C Munro in February 2008, the Wellington District Law Society Complaints Committee investigated the conduct of the First and Second Appellants (who were partners in the same legal practice) regarding matters the subject of Mr Munro’s complaint. [2] As a consequence of that investigation the committee resolved to lay charges against both appellants before the Wellington Law Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal. Charges, dated 31 Octobe...
BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2013] NZREADT 12 READT 035/12 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under s.112 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN DENIS FETHERSTON Appellant AND REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC20005) First Respondent AND RICHARD MILNE Second Respondent MEMBERS OF TRIBUNAL Ms K Davenport – Chairperson Mr J Gaukrodger – Member Mr G Denley – Member HEARD AT AUCKLAND 29 Jan...
...“The Barn”. It may be that it was drugs paraphernalia but equally it might be that he was concerned that there might be stolen property. We can assume that the Police did not or could not establish that Mr Gardiner was perverting the course of justice by ensuring that the stolen property was hidden because he has not been charged or cautioned. The Police only spoke to Mr Gardiner. Our conclusion must therefore be that this behaviour was not criminal but was certainly most unwise....
ALLIED SECURITY LIMITED v EDDIE MARRIOTT NZEmpC CHRISTCHURCH [2015] NZEmpC 96 [23 June 2015] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT CHRISTCHURCH [2015] NZEmpC 96 EMPC 58/2015 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER of a stay of proceedings BETWEEN ALLIED SECURITY LIMITED Applicant AND EDDIE MARRIOTT Respondent Hearing: (on the papers dated 8, 18 , 25 May and 2 June 2...