Appeal — Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal — cancellation of immigration advisers licence — sanctions — application for review — limitation on sanctions — ZW v Immigration Advisers Authority [2012] NZHC 1069 — Kacem v Bashir [2011] 2 NZLR 1 — Z v Dental Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55 — Immigrations Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s 81. The appellant sought to appeal three sanctions decisions of the Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal in which cancellation of her immigration adviser's licence was ordered. Three complaints had been made against the appellant and the Tribunal had imposed sanctions including censure, compensation, a penalty fine, immediate cancellation of her licence and restrictions on when she could apply for any category of licence. In each of the complaints, the Tribunal had concluded that cancellation was justified. The appellant had one of the decisions reviewed in the High Court where it was found that the Tribunal was entitled to conclude that the appellant had acted dishonestly. The court noted that the appellant had applied for and received interim orders permitting her to continue to provide immigration advice subject to Court imposed conditions until the appeals were determined. At issue in these appeals was whether the Tribunal had made an error in exercising their s 51 discretion to impose the sanction of cancellation of of the appellant's license; the appellant claiming that the sanction was harsh and manifestly excessive and the Tribunal had failed to take proper account of the appellant's personal circumstances in making the decision. The court found that each of the complaints lodged against the appellant were justified and the licence cancellations were not demonstrably unjustified. While this would usually result in dismissal of the appeal, the court found that it would be "completely pointless" for the interim orders to lapse on the dismissal of an appeal. It was noted that the appellant had completed the course required of her by the sanctions, of which some clearly contained a rehabilitative intent allowing opportunity for re-entry into the profession. The court amended the restrictions on when the appellant could apply for a new licence to expire on the date of the ruling. The court deferred making a final decision on the appeal, pending the authority's decision regarding the appellant's application for a new licence. Judgment Date: 27 September 2017.