Search Results

1. [2020] NZIACDT 9 - DKD v Smith - Sanctions (13 February 2020) [pdf, 147 KB]

   ...focus, the issues of punishment and deterrence must also be taken into account in selecting the appropriate penalty.5 3 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151] (citations omitted). 4 Dentice v Valuers Registration Board [1992] 1 NZLR 720 (HC) at 724–725 & 727; Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee, above n 3, at [151]. 5 Patel v Complaints Assessment Committee HC Auc...

2. [2023] NZEnvC 075 Gray v Dunedin City Council [pdf, 289 KB]

   ...constitute unreasonable arguments being put forward. Costs in the Environment Court [11] Under s285 of the RMA, the Environment Court may order any party to pay any other party the reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the other party. Section 285 confers a broad discretion. There is no scale of costs under the RMA. The Environment Court Practice Note 2023 sets out guidelines in relation to costs. However, the Practice Note does not create an inflexible rule or practice.7...

3. [2022] NZEmpC 36 Kang v Saena Company Ltd [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...the judgment. [12] The amount sought to be protected by the freezing and ancillary orders was $62,465.06. That sum combined the amount claimed and an estimate of costs calculated on a Category 2B basis.3 Power to make freezing orders [13] Section 190(3) of the Act provides the Court with the same powers to make freezing orders as applies in the High Court. The High Court Rules 2016 are applied to an application in this Court with appropriate modifications. [14] Rule 32.2...

4. [2022] NZIACDT 26 — DA v Ji (8 November 2022) [pdf, 121 KB]

   ...the public and the profession is the focus, the issues of punishment and deterrence must also be taken into account in selecting the appropriate penalty.5 3 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151]. 4 Dentice v Valuers Registration Board [1992] 1 NZLR 720 (HC) at 724–725 & 727; Bolton v Law Society [1994] 2 All ER 486 (EWCA) at 492; Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee, above n 3, at [151]. 5 Patel v Compla...

5. [2023] NZIACDT 24 WN v Lawlor (25 August 2023) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...the public and the profession is the focus, the issues of punishment and deterrence must also be taken into account in selecting the appropriate penalty.5 3 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] and [151]. 4 Dentice v Valuers Registration Board [1992] 1 NZLR 720 (HC) at 724–725 and 727; Bolton v Law Society [1994] 2 All ER 486 (EWCA) at 492; and Z, above n 3, at [151]. 5 Patel v Complaints Assessment Committee HC Auckland CIV-2...

6. [2024] NZIACDT 10 – MM v Ma (12 March 2024) [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...propriety and professional conduct not just for the public good, but also to protect the collective reputation and public confidence in the profession itself.4 3 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] and [151]. 4 Dentice v Valuers Registration Board [1992] 1 NZLR 720 (HC) at 724–725 and 727; Bolton v Law Society [1994] 2 All ER 486 (EWCA) at 492; and Z, above n 3, at [151]. 8 [33] While protection of the public and the pr...

7. [2023] NZIACDT 19 - BC v Murthy (7 June 2023) [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...concerned and what may be required to ensure that, in the public interest, such standards are met in the future. The protection of the public is the central focus. 4 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] and [151]. 7 … Lord Diplock pointed out in Ziderman v General Dental Council that the purpose of disciplinary proceedings is to protect the public who may come to a practitioner and to maintain the high standards and good...

8. [2024] NZIACDT 20 – LB v Luv (8 July 2024) [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...concerned and what may be required to ensure that, in the public interest, such standards are met in the future. The protection of the public is the central focus. 4 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] and [151]. 7 … Lord Diplock pointed out in Ziderman v General Dental Council that the purpose of disciplinary proceedings is to protect the public who may come to a practitioner and to maintain the high standards and good...

9. [2024] NZIACDT 21 KL v Lawlor (sanctions) (19 July 2024) [pdf, 215 KB]

   ...propriety and professional conduct not just for the public good, but also to protect the collective reputation and public confidence in the profession itself.4 3 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] and [151]. 4 Dentice v Valuers Registration Board [1992] 1 NZLR 720 (HC) at 724–725 and 727; Bolton v Law Society [1994] 2 All ER 486 (EWCA) at 492; and Z, above n 3, at [151]. 7 [21] While protection of the public and the pr...

10. [2025] NZIACDT 20 – EI v Liu (3 March 2025) [pdf, 119 KB]

    ...the public and the profession is the focus, the issues of punishment and deterrence must also be taken into account in selecting the appropriate penalty.5 3 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] and [151]. 4 Dentice v Valuers Registration Board [1992] 1 NZLR 720 (HC) at 724–725 and 727; Bolton v Law Society [1994] 2 All ER 486 (EWCA) at 492; and Z, above n 3, at [151]. 5 Patel v Complaints Assessment Committee HC Auckland CIV-2...