Search Results

1. LCRO 103/2021 & LCRO 58/2022, LCRO 104/2021 and LCRO 105/2021 GS v ABC Ltd & HY, [Law Firm A] v ABC Ltd & HY and SW v [Area] Standards Committee [X] (24 November 2022) [pdf, 595 KB]

   LEGAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW OFFICER ĀPIHA AROTAKE AMUAMU Ā-TURE [2022] NZLCRO 126 Ref: LCRO 103/2021 LCRO 058/2022 LCRO 104/2021 LCRO 105/2021 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN GS Applicant AND AND BETWEEN AND AND BETWEEN AND ABC LTD and HY Responden

2. LCRO 104/2018 CJ v MV (28 February 2020) [pdf, 189 KB]

   ...fees were fair and reasonable. [93] In my view, $8,512.50, which excludes attendances relating to the unregistered notice of claim, is a fair and reasonable fee for the services Mr MV provided to Mr CJ between October 2016 and February 2017. Consequential orders – s 156 [94] A finding of unsatisfactory conduct under s 12 of the Act establishes the statutory basis on which to make consequential orders pursuant to s 156. Section 156 15 sets out the range of orders that can...

3. [2019] NZEnvC 196 Te Runanga O Ngati Awa v Bay of Plenty Regional Council [pdf, 2.5 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA Decision No [2019] NZEnvC IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND of three appeals under section 120 of the Act AND an application for declarations under s 310 of the Act BETWEEN TE RONANGA O NGATI AWA (ENV-2018-AKL-000133) NGATI TOWHARETOA (BOP) SETTLEMENT TRUST AND AND AND AND (ENV-2018-AKL-000134) SUSTAINABLE OTAKIRI INCORPORATED (ENV-2018-AKL-000135) Appellants SUSTAINABLE OTAK

4. Cabinet paper - Tyson Gregory Redman application for compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment: next steps [pdf, 4.4 MB]

   ...[CAB-17-MIN-0493, paragraphs 7 - 8]: 9 50.1. The total amount of compensation assessed by Dr Stevens for non­ pecuniary losses ($327,311.43) should be multiplied by the change in the relevant inflation index; 50.2. The relevant index was the Consumer Price Index (All Groups CPI / index SE9A), which reflects the change in purchasing power over any specified period; 50.3. The starting point for inflation adjustment should be July 2000, when the $100,000 benchmarks in the Additional...

5. X Ltd v Q Ltd [2024] NZDT 261 (14 March 2024) [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...installation of a home heating system on the basis that the clause was buried amongst thirty clauses on one page in very small font. However, the clause in that case was not only considered to be hard to see but was related to services supplied in a consumer context, where exclusion of liability is unexpected and usually not possible in a setting regulated by statutory consumer guarantees. By contrast, in this case, clause 46 appeared in a commercial setting, was in an easily readable p...

6. [2021] NZIACDT 3 - DY v Parker (25 February 2021) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...fine would be appropriate. In the circumstances, that could be towards the lower end of the possible range. One of the key objectives of upholding professional discipline has been met as Mr Parker acknowledged his central error of judgement and consequentially amended the management of his practice following receipt of the first complaint against him in 2019. [24] Mr Moses points out that while the total fees agreed were $40,000, only $10,000 was paid. The work of preparing a...

7. [2020] NZIACDT 50 - KX v Ji (2 December 2020) [pdf, 225 KB]

   ...complaint is, as he acknowledges, serious. He was dishonest in that he deceived his client on numerous occasions over a period of about 18 months as to the negative outcome of her immigration application. He did not tell her about the outcome or her consequential unlawful status. He did not inform her of the remedial action he undertook, nor its outcome. Indeed, the dishonesty was more than just failing to keep her informed. Mr Ji actively deceived the complainant about the statu...

8. LCRO 83/2024 AGM v CPF (24 March 2025) [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...persuaded that the conduct breaches, when considered in their totality and by reference to the broad circumstances of the retainer, merit imposition of a fine in the sum of $5,000. [91] I consider a fine of $2,000 adequately meets the regulatory and consumer protection objectives. Costs [92] Ms AGM has had partial success with her review but in large part the finding of the Standards Committee has been confirmed. It is appropriate that Ms AGM be ordered to contribute to the costs of...

9. LCRO 3/2017 and LCRO 148/2017 McDonnell v LA (28 June 2019) [pdf, 436 KB]

   ...complaint by Ms LA about Ms McDonnell’s conduct whilst acting in the administration of Ms LA’s late father’s estate (Mr A). The Committee made a finding of unsatisfactory conduct against Ms McDonnell and imposed a fine together with other consequential orders (the liability determination). [3] The Committee’s second determination ordered publication of a summary of the matter including Ms McDonnell’s name. The Committee also ordered Ms McDonnell to pay compensation to...

10. LCRO 177/2021 FA v LL (14 March 2022) [pdf, 238 KB]

    ...[143] Ms FA justifies the need for training, audit and oversight orders on grounds that others with whom Ms LL might deal in contentious matters, should not have to endure what she has. [144] Public confidence in the provision of legal services and consumer protection are principles which underpin the Act.19 The disciplinary process is designed to ensure that these values are upheld and maintained. [145] Nevertheless the disciplinary response for any breach by a lawyer of the Act,...