You can search by selecting a jurisdiction, a keyword (for example a name) or browse by year.

Helpful search tips:

  • If you are doing a keyword search (eg. misconduct), please note that this search will only produce decisions where the keyword appears in the title or decision description.
  • If you want to search the entire decision document for certain keywords, you will need to use full website search located in the top right hand corner of this page.
Search results

498 items matching your search terms

  1. National Standards Committee 2 v Mr Q [2023] NZLCDT 27 (18 July 2023) [PDF, 75 KB]

    Name suppression / Tribunal initially declined name suppression as practitioner’s interests did not tip balance from starting point of open justice / practitioner sought judicial review / High Court required Tribunal to reconsider name suppression having regard to interests of complainants, an unrelated practitioner that shares practitioner’s uncommon name and other similarities, and practitioner’s family members / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 240 / HELD / real likelihood that unrelated practitioner will be unfairly associated with practitioner’s misconduct / one of two complainants supports name suppression / effect of publication on practitioner’s family members considered / unusual combination of factors tipped balance in favour of suppression / name suppression proper to avoid confusion with unrelated practitioner and damage to his reputation and legal practice, having regard to serious misconduct of practitioner / permanent name suppression granted

  2. Wellington Standards Committee 1 v Mr V [2023] NZLCDT 26 (16 June 2023) [PDF, 113 KB]

    Penalty / negligence for issuing seven inaccurate invoices / HELD / offending at moderate level of seriousness / conduct took place over long period of time and involved multiple errors / inaccuracies were not trivial / practitioner showed lack of responsibility or lack of insight, but did self-report to Law Society / one prior adverse finding of unsatisfactory conduct a weak aggravating factor / mitigating factors / references / community work / conduct not undertaken for personal gain / cooperated with disciplinary process / references given considerable weight as they provide insight into practitioner’s altruism, which endorses public confidence in profession / public protection not a factor as practitioner is retired and his conduct caused no harm / Tribunal ordered censure and $8,000 fine / practitioner to pay contribution towards Standards Committee’s costs ($12,500) and full Tribunal’s costs / permanent name suppression granted

  3. Wellington Standards Committee 2 v O'Connor [2023] NZLCDT 25 (9 June 2023) [PDF, 188 KB]

    Penalty / misconduct for using client’s money as own despite client not receiving independent advice / negligence for failing to structure professional relationship and embarking on risky litigation strategy / HELD / conduct occurred 18 months after practitioner persuaded Law Society he had reformed / misconduct comprising 17 failures and finding of negligence which had potentially serious consequences for client takes conduct to most serious end of misconduct / aggravating features / prior convictions involving dishonesty and breach of trust / failure to disclose bankruptcies when applying for certificate of character / lying to Tribunal / lack of insight or accountability / disciplinary history / length of time of conduct / mitigating feature of pro bono and community work / not capable of rehabilitation / Tribunal ordered practitioner be struck off and pay compensation ($25,000) to client / practitioner to pay Standards Committee’s and Tribunal’s costs

  4. Central Standards Committee 3 v Bong [2023] NZLCDT 24 (8 June 2023) [PDF, 130 KB]

    Liability and penalty / failed to ensure client gave accurate information about business ownership despite circumstances which should have alerted him to further enquiry / client’s business sold without authority of other owner of business / Conduct and Client Care Rules 2008, rule 11.4 / HELD / failure had serious consequences but was an honest mistake / not disgraceful or dishonourable or reckless breach of rules / not negligent / culpability reduced by the fact that the business’ land was in client’s sole name / practitioner was away when financing statement naming other business owner was revealed immediately before settlement / deprived him of opportunity of reinvestigation / unsatisfactory conduct proved (section 12(a)) / mitigating feature of clean record / Tribunal ordered practitioner to pay $5,000 fine and compensation ($3,000) to other business owner / practitioner to pay contribution to Standards Committee’s costs ($15,000) and full Tribunal’s costs