Recent Tribunal decisions – August 2026

BM v Nantes [2026] NZIACDT 45

The Tribunal found Ms Nantes breached clauses 1, 2(e), 17(b), 18(b), 26(b) and (c) of the Code of Conduct for the following conduct:

• Failing to explain to the complainant the summary of professional standards, in breach of cl 17(b).
• Failing to explain the significant matters in the written agreement, in breach of cl 18(b).
• Failing to send critical communications from Immigration New Zealand to the complainant, in breach of cls 1 and 26(b).
• Failing to confirm material discussions in writing to the complainant, in breach of cl 26(c).
• Failing to carry out the complainant’s instructions to withdraw the visa application, in breach of cl 2(e).
• Failing to follow Immigration NZ’s process in seeking the police certificate and hence was not professional nor diligent nor exercised due care, in breach of cl 1.

Ms Nantes was censured, ordered to undertake and successfully complete Toi Ohomai’s LAWS 7015 Professional Practice paper at its next intake, ordered to pay to the Registrar $3,000 and pay to the complainant $9,480 within one month of the decision.

INZ (Watson) v Wan [2026] NZIACDT 44

The Tribunal found that Mr Wan breached clauses 1, 2(e), 18(b), 26(b) and (c) of the Code of Conduct for the following conduct:

• Failing to explain all significant matters in the agreement to the clients, in breach of cl 18(b).
• Failing to give the clients an opportunity to review their visa applications, in breach of cl 1.
• Failing to confirm in writing to the clients when their applications were lodged, in breach of cl 26(b).
• Failing to personally and directly, throughout the engagement, obtain the instructions of the clients, in breach of cl 2(e).
• Failing to confirm in writing to the clients the details of all material discussions, in breach of cl 26(c).

Mr Wan was censured and ordered to pay $4,000 to the Registrar within one month of the decision.

XL v Zhu [2026] NZIACDT 42

The Tribunal found that Ms Zhu breached clauses 1, 2(e), 3(c), 14, 18(a) and 26(b) of the Code of Conduct for the following conduct:

• Failing to provide the complainant with an opportunity to review the visa application before it was lodged, in breach of cl 1.
• Failing to obtain (personally and directly) the complainant’s instructions by communicating with him, in breach of cl 2(e).
• Allowing and relying on the unlicensed person to provide immigration services, in breach of cl 3(c).
• Failing to provide the complainant with evidence of being licensed, in breach of cl 14.
• Failing to provide the complainant with a written agreement, in breach of cl 18(a).
• Failing to confirm in writing to the complainant the lodgement of his application and to make timely updates, in breach of cl 26(b).

Ms Zhu was censured and ordered to pay $4,000 to the Registrar within one month of the decision.

NM v Nantes-Bautista [2026] NZIACDT 40

The Tribunal found that Ms Nantes breached clauses 1, 17(c), 18(b) and 26(b) of the Code of Conduct for the following conduct:

• Failing to correctly advise the client about her eligibility under the 2021 RV category, in breach of cl 1.
• Failing to forward to the client in a timely manner Immigration New Zealand’s letter of decline of 20 June 2023, in breach of cl 26(b).
• Failing to respond in a timely manner to the client’s enquiry about important visa information in the decline letter, in breach of cl 1.
• Failing to advise the client she had an internal complaints procedure and provide a copy, in breach of cl 17(c).
• Failing to explain to the client all significant matters in the written agreement, in breach of cl 18(b).

Ms Nantes was censured, ordered to pay $3,000 to the Registrar and $5,690 to the Complainant within one month of the decision.

XA v Huang [2026] NZIACDT 39

The Tribunal found that Mr Huang breached clauses 1, 5, 6, 17(b), 18(b), 19(l) and 20(a) of the Code of Conduct for the following conduct:

• Failed to provide the client with an opportunity to review the draft visa application prior to filing it, in breach of cl 1.
• Failed to explain to the client his professional obligations and also the significant matters in the agreement, in breach of cls 17(b) and 18(b).
• Failed to disclose in writing to the client a potential conflict of interest and obtain consent to act, and also to record the conflict in the service agreement, in breach of cls 5, 6 and 19(l).
• Failed to charge a reasonable fee, in breach of cl 20(a).

Mr Huang was censured, ordered to pay $4,000 to the Registrar and $7,000 to the Complainant within one month of the decision.

New decisions are appearing regularly, and we encourage you to save the following link as a bookmark.

Recent Tribunal decisions(external link) – Ministry of Justice