This site is in beta. We are still smoothing out rough edges. If you spot something wrong or have a suggestion, tell us on the contact page.

[2024] NZIACDT 27, INZ v Tran

A decision of the Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal, decided 20 November 2024.

The Tribunal's published summary, reproduced as issued.

The decision

The decision at a glance
FactDetail
Decision makerImmigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal
Citation[2024] NZIACDT 27
PartiesINZ v Tran
Decided20 November 2024

The Tribunal's published summary

“Professional practice / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s45, s49, s50 and s51 / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1, cl2e, cl14, cl17 and cl18b / HELD / adviser had little or no direct communication with client / agent could not sign service contract on client’s behalf in absence of disability or other compelling reason / client’s mother’s consent irrelevant / adviser must ensure client personally signs and understands contract / breach of cl18c and cl1 / permitted unlicensed agent to perform work required to be undertaken by the licensed adviser / ‘rubber stamping’ / failed to directly and personally inform the client and obtain informed instructions / breach of cl2e and cl1 / failed to provide evidence of licence to client / recording status as adviser in e-mail signature insufficient / breach of cl14 and cl1 / failed to provide client with summary and explanation of professional responsibilities, complaints procedure and Code / breach of cl17 / complaint upheld / sanctions to follow”

Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal, [2024] NZIACDT 27 (PDF, Ministry of Justice)

Sources