Search Results

1. [2020] NZIACDT 14 - Singh v Ryan - Sanctions (27 February 2020) [pdf, 123 KB]

   ...who may come to a practitioner and to maintain the high standards and good reputation of an honourable profession. 4 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151] (citations omitted). 7 [26] Professional conduct schemes, with their attached compliance regimes, exist to maintain high standards of propriety and professional conduct not just for the public good, but also to protect...

2. [2020] NZIACDT 12 - TSO v Essina (27 February 2020) - Sanctions [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...standards of propriety and professional conduct not just for the public good, but also to protect the profession itself.4 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]. 8 [37] While protection of the public an...

3. NLT v Coetzee [2020] NZIACDT 7 (10 February 2020) Sanctions [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...the public interest, such standards are met in the future. The protection of the public is the central focus. … 3 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151] (citations omitted). 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...

4. FBN v Broadway [2019] NZIACDT 77 (28 November 2019) Sanctions [pdf, 127 KB]

   ...focus, the issues of punishment and deterrence must also be taken into account in selecting the appropriate penalty.7 5 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151] (citations omitted). 6 Dentice v Valuers Registration Board [1992] 1 NZLR 720 (HC) at 724–725 & 727; Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee, above n 5, at [151]. 7 Patel v Complaints Assessment Committee HC Auc...

5. [2022] NZIACDT 15 - BC v Lawlor (29 June 2022) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...disciplinary proceedings is to protect the public who may come to a practitioner and to maintain the high standards and good reputation of an honourable profession. 3 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151]. 9 [35] Professional conduct schemes, with their attached compliance regimes, exist to maintain high standards of propriety and professional conduct not just for the public good, but also to protect the collecti...

6. [2022] NZEmpC 115 Kowhai Intermediate School Board of Trustees [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...the appropriate period was from the date of dismissal, 11 April 2017, until the date when the Tribunal released its decision, 28 July 2020. [37] On any view, this claim is a significant one given the three-month starting point described in s 128 of the Act. However, both parties’ positions are well outside that starting point; thus the provisions of the section assume rather less relevance than might usually be the case. The current positions of both parties recognise that the...

7. [2021] NZIACDT 23 - CL v Khetarpal (24 September 2021) [pdf, 228 KB]

   ...practitioner for misbehaviour, although it may have that effect, but to ensure that appropriate standards of conduct are maintained in the occupation concerned. 3 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151]. 8 … The purpose of disciplinary proceedings is materially different to that of a criminal trial. It is to ascertain whether a practitioner has met appropriate standards of conduct in the occupation concerned and...

8. [2024] NZEmpC 103 Carrington Resort Jade LP v Maheno (Interlocutory Judgment [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...issued in regards to the same. 5 Assured Financial Peace Ltd v Pais [2010] NZEmpC 50 at [5]; and Dymocks Franchise Systems (NSW) Pty Ltd v Bilgola Enterprises Ltd (1999) 13 PRNZ 48 (CA). 6 See Grove v Archibald [1998] 2 ERNZ 125 (EmpC) at 128–129; and Bathurst Resources Ltd v L&M Coal Holdings Ltd [2020] NZCA 186, (2020) 25 PRNZ 341 at [19]–[20]. 7 Duncan v Osborne Building Ltd (1992) 6 PRNZ 85 (CA) at 87. (c) If Mr Maheno is successful in the substantive proce...

9. [2023] NZIACDT 20 - II v Sun - Sanctions (21 June 2023) [pdf, 132 KB]

   ...regulation of persons who give immigration advice. [28] The focus of professional disciplinary proceedings is not punishment, but the protection of the public:3 3 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] and [151]. 7 …It is well established that professional disciplinary proceedings are civil and not criminal in nature. That is because the purpose of statutory disciplinary proceedings for various occupations is not to punis...

10. [2024] NZIACDT 08 - MT v Murthy (21 February 2024) [pdf, 127 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...