Please clarify and confirm the "client" being referred to is the Entity known as the "ACC" or "The Authority".
Thus and therefore clarifying and confirming that Dane was acting on behalf of the Entity known as the ACC and the purpose and intent and legislation and case law governing and forming the body of the Entity known as the ACC or is Dane acting on behalf of the directions of a person employed by the Entity known as the ACC.
The directions are given by the " Authority " or the ACC through its legislation .
Dane is obliged to follow the directions of his client as these are set out in the legislation.
His client is the Authority
Please clarify these points for me.
ACC staff members and employees can make decisions and give directions however if these contradict the legislation of Dane's client, being the Authority, his obligation to properly uphold the directions of his client as set out in legislation and case law would override any duty or obligations towards an agent or employee of the ACC / the authority.
I require clarification of this in order to properly understand and respond to the attachment.
Please do not hesitate to contact me for clarification of any of my question or queries.
What or who or whom exactly is the "Client" Dane was acting for ?.
The number of directions given by The Authority to Dane are from the ACC Legislation ?.
Dane is obliged to follow the instructions of the client being the Authority or the ACC or the legislation or the purposes and intentions of someone employed by the ACC or an agent of the ACC ?
I am sure this is set out clearly somewhere and can be easily provided and explained to me.
No replies to this topic