Decision on liability and penalty. Date of decision: 9 February 2024.
You can search by selecting a jurisdiction, a keyword (for example a name) or browse by year.
Helpful search tips:
553 items matching your search terms
Decision on liability and penalty. Date of decision: 9 February 2024.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 9 February 2024. Date of reissued decision: 21 February 2024.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 5 December 2023.
Decision on liability. Date of decision: 20 November 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 7 November 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 31 October 2023.
Decision on liability and penalty. Date of decision: 31 October 2023.
Decision rescinded 1 August 2024. See decision [2024] NZLCDT 22.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 13 October 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 10 October 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 10 October 2023.
Decision on costs. Date of decision: 21 September 2023.
Decision on costs. Date of decision: 1 September 2023.
Decision on manner of compliance with witness summonses. Date of decision: 23 August 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 18 August 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 17 August 2023.
Decision on application to practice on own account. Date of decision: 16 August 2023.
Decision on application to strike out proceeding. Date of decision: 4 August 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 27 July 2023.
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
Decision on application for restoration to the roll. Date of decision: 18 July 2023.
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
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
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
Penalty / practitioner admitted two charges of misconduct / failed to comply with Standards Committee order / failed to respond to enquiries or requests from Standards Committee in timely manner / HELD / failing to engage with professional body and comply with orders always treated seriously / practitioner promptly engaged another practitioner to supervise his practice / previous finding of unsatisfactory conduct shows troubling pattern of behaviour / mitigating factors / long career without disciplinary action / poor physical health / commitment to care for wife during illness which moved practitioner’s focus away from practice / willingness to be supervised by another practitioner ensuring no repetition of procrastination / Tribunal ordered censure, two months’ suspension and supervision / practitioner to pay Standards Committee’s and Tribunal’s costs