Search Results

1. ZF v XC LCRO 266/2013 (19 February 2015) [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...correct advice had been provided, she would not have incurred legal fees in responding to the claim by Mr AB’s children and the outcome she sought was to be compensated for the costs incurred. [39] The final part of the complaint relates to the response from [Firm B] to the letters of complaint sent by Mrs PE to the firm. [40] Following a consideration of the matter the Standards Committee:10 …issued a preliminary view that the advice that was provided by Mr ZF was wrong to suc...

2. LCRO 116/2015 QO v Standards Committee (14 June 2018) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...“emphasising the need to preserve confidentiality and to ensure that systems and practises safeguarded that”. (c) There is no evidence: (i) of the circumstances in which two individual pages were disclosed in 2012 and 2015 or which employee was responsible for those disclosures; (ii) that identifies practices or procedures in her firm, for which she was responsible, which were substandard; (iii) that supports a determination that she did not diligently attend to her respon...

3. LCRO 175/2020 PM obo MNO Limited v FS and BL (22 April 2021) [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...credit by [CAT] against fees submitted to a minimum of $2313.80 – this includes a credit for [CAT’s] fees charged for issuing [the Notice] (in error)/writing of Letter of Acknowledgement and costs for my time engaged to resolve this matter. Response by the lawyers [27] Through counsel, Mr BW QC, the lawyers responded as follows:5 (a) Mr PM’s complaint appears to relate to his liability to pay legal fees incurred by [XY] in enforcing the lease. (b) All steps were taken by the...

4. LCRO 10/2018 DO v ABC & Body Corporate (30 August 2019) [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...10.2 of the Rules. [20] Rule 10.2 of the Rules relevantly provides: A lawyer acting in a matter must not communicate directly with a person whom the lawyer knows is represented by another lawyer in that matter except as authorised in this rule.4 Response by Mr DO [21] In a 24 July 2017 letter to the NZLS, Mr DO’s employers (the partners of [Law firm X]) submitted that: (a) one of their clients (the proposer of the motion) was concerned at the cost benefit of the appeal and had...

5. LCRO 116/2019 RLF v DN (29 January 2020) [pdf, 211 KB]

   ...uniforms and World War I embroidery. 4 (2) Mr DN’s actions as BG’s (successor) attorney [18] Mr LF claimed his lawyer asked (by letter) Mr DN on 31 January 2019 what was “happening” about BG’s affairs. He said not having received a response he was “worried” what Mr DN “had done” with BG’s assets. He said apart from Mr DN, there was “no one else to keep an eye” on what BG was doing. (3) BG’s will [19] He said he had only just received a copy of p...

6. [2023] NZEnvC 206 Woolley v Marlborough District Council [pdf, 384 KB]

   ...Accompanying information [32] The information filed in support of the water take permit application responded to a question on a standardised form published by the Council6 requiring that the purpose for which the water is required is to be stated. The response to this was for “irrigation of pasture and food crops”. [33] The form included a consumption schedule which was also filled in by Mr Woolley. That required information for the crop types intended to be irrigated, incl...

7. LCRO 136/2023 QT v MZ (8 January 2024) [pdf, 220 KB]

   ...respondent another email, copied to the same recipients, in which he relevantly: (a) referred to “your client’s consistent threats and insistent false claims”; (b) stated that no agreement had been made at the meeting; (c) referred to TL’s responsibilities as a trustee; (d) referred to the respondent’s responsibilities under a “Code of Practice”. (e) asserted that the respondent had not “treat[ed] your opponent with dignity and respect”. [15] At 8.14pm, the res...

8. [2013] NZEmpC 82 Tan v Morningstar Institute of Education Ltd t/a Morningstar Preschool [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...going to happen next, but he did not express that at the time. His minutes record what Ms Tan said next: Catherine (Very calm): I understand from business point of view, it makes sense. I also understand, as a leader, I need to take more responsibility; this is a leader’s duty. How many will go? Nina: Only you already made us pain enough. Catherine: Ok, when do I need to finish my job? [19] When Ms Tan asked when she needed to finish her job Mr Tan records that...

9. Reekie v Roberts [2013] NZHRRT 7 [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...with your Lawyer” which explained the complaints process. Mr Reekie apparently then made a complaint against Mr Roberts in relation to his representation of Mr Reekie during the May 2003 trial. Produced in evidence was Mr Roberts’ eight page response letter to the ADLS dated 20 March 2007. It contains a detailed and forceful rebuttal of the allegations made by Mr Reekie. The final paragraph concludes with a paragraph that assumes some importance to the issues before the Tribunal:...

10. Programme evaluation of Target Hardening pilot [pdf, 673 KB]

    ...way to assist these victims, both to reduce the trauma for those who experienced multiple burglary, and also to reduce the overall burglary rate. This report presents an evaluation of a pilot Target Hardening Programme which began operating as a response to these concerns in the Auckland area in April 2001. It is funded by the Ministry of Justice and administered by the New Zealand Council of Victim Support Groups (Victim Support). Since its inception, it has operated across seven Vict...