LCRO 37/2025 PE v LZ (26 August 2025) [pdf, 183 KB]
...dealt with by Ms T; (c) the respondent was not responsible for what occurred following his departure; (d) there had been no significant delays such as to constitute a breach of r 3 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules). 6 [20] The Committee considered that the evidence did not establish that the respondent had failed to advise the applicant that costs might be awarded to the winning party and, on the contrary, considered t...