[2023] NZIACDT 10 — NG v Murthy (Nirmala K Murthy)

Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal · decided 15 March 2023 · adviser: Nirmala K Murthy

The tribunal's published summary

Diligence and due care / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s442, s50, s51 / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1, cl18a, cl26f / HELD / breaches of cl1 / adviser failed to request INZ file and missed adverse information / explanation about time-sensitive nature of application must be seen in context of delay in filing / also, failed to provide client with opportunity to review submissions / in urgent cases, may not be practical for client to review a draft, but given delays, submissions could have been reviewed / breach of cl18a / adviser accepts she did not provide a written agreement for a second s61 request / no answer that no fee was charged / no breach of cl26f / provided new adviser with file and provided further information on request / not required to also send file to subsequent advisers or provide file notes under cl26f / any failure to send full file not sufficiently serious to justify disciplinary response as new adviser did not seek further disclosure

Read the full decision (PDF, Ministry of Justice)

This page reproduces the tribunal's own published summary as a fair report of public tribunal proceedings; the linked decision is the authoritative record. A decision is not itself a finding of wrongdoing — some complaints are dismissed. Complainants are anonymised by the tribunal. Complaints about advisers go to the Immigration Advisers Authority.