You can search by selecting a jurisdiction, a keyword (for example a name) or browse by year.
Some jurisdictions only publish a selection of decisions. Identifying details may be removed.

Helpful search tips:

  • If you are looking for a specific decision with a forward slash in the title (eg, 123/2014), you will need to replace the forward slash with a space (eg, 123 2014), as the website cannot pick up on forward slashes (/) or any other characters.
  • 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.
  • If you want to search for a decision from a particular jurisdiction using the full website search, put both the jurisdiction name and the keyword in the search field (eg, LCRO misconduct).
Search results

1388 items matching your search terms

  1. LCRO 59/2021 RY v QX (21 December 2022) [PDF, 255 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / trust matter / lawyer acted for two trustees in the removal of complainant as a trustee / complainant claims he was wrongly removed / lawyer incorrectly certified he had authority to act for trustees as transferor / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, r 2.5 / r 2.6 / HELD / lawyer did not owe complainant professional duties as he was not a client / LCRO does not have jurisdiction to determine matters involving exercising power or discretion vested in a trustee / determination for lawyer’s certification for e-dealing purposes to transfer the trust’s properties is reserved to the court / decision modified to provide that there is an adequate remedy available to complainant / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)  
  2. LCRO 176/2021 BR v UE and VJ (7 December 2022) [PDF, 223 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / litigation matter / complaint lawyer accused opposing lawyer and her client of lying and misrepresenting / lawyer called opposing lawyer incompetent / tone of lawyer’s communication was disrespectful / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, r 10.1 / HELD / lawyer’s conduct breached r 10.1 / conduct not a threat to the public / lawyer apologised for his conduct / neither High Court or the Court of Appeal found it necessary to make any comment on this conduct / lawyer ordered to pay costs / Committee’s finding of unsatisfactory conduct reversed / section 211(1)(a)  
  3. 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]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / commercial property matter / lawyers made a number of strategic errors that was costly for the complainant / complainant was poorly advised / lawyers’ failed to identify appropriate legal remedies / lawyers paid little attention to the possible consequences when providing advice / excessive fees / lawyers continued illegality argument instead of focusing on alternative remedies / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 12(c) / section 152(2)(b) / section 156(1)(f) / section 156(1)(i) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9.1 / rule 9.1(c) / HELD / more comprehensive assessment of risk factors was required / indication of litigation risk should to be thoroughly explained / lawyer’s failed to be sufficiently responsive to changing circumstances / lawyer’s failed to ensure complainant was adequately informed as to her costs exposure / significant sum of costs to incur in defending proceedings…
  4. LCRO 119/2022 FT v GS (31 October 2022) [PDF, 183 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / litigation matter / legal aid / application to amend grant of legal aid misrepresented client instructions / lawyer compromised case by giving inaccurate account of grounds of defence / incompetently managed evidence of witnesses instructed / HELD / application to amend the legal aid grant did not adversely affected client’s ability to secure a grant nor compromise defence / experts called to give evidence were supportive of complainant’s position in litigation / no evidence to support contention that complainant suffered adverse outcome as a consequence of comments made by lawyer / inquiries made of witnesses did not indicate lack of competence or diligence / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  6. LCRO 75/2022 BG v HC (25 October 2022) [PDF, 212 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / employment dispute matter / lawyer called complainant delusional and difficult / fee charged was excessive / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.1 / HELD / lawyer breached his obligation to act courteously and respectfully / clear explanation of charge out rate given / no contention to support lawyer lost faith in his client’s claim /no other professional obligations or duties breached / lawyer ordered to pay costs to NZLS / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  7. LCRO 18/2021 MB v RP and ND (14 October 2022) [PDF, 265 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / trust matter / conflict of interest / claim that lawyers who are trustees acted for other trustees as a lawyer / did lawyers breach professional standards by advising to sell trust property / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 section 3(1) / s 4(d) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6.1 / HELD / lawyers’ role confined to act as trustee of estate / no lawyer-client relationship with estate / decision to sell property reached by lawyers in their capacity as trustees not lawyers / Committee’s decision confirmed but modified / section 211(1)(a)
  8. LCRO 119/2021 FE v AD of [Firm 1] (14 October 2022) [PDF, 267 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action / company matter / lawyer acting for more than one client on a matter / more than a negligible / lawyer continuing to represent company after assuring he would not / conflict of duties / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6.1 / r 8.7 / r 8.7.1 / HELD / lawyer breached r 6.1 / more than negligible risk to be unable to discharge obligations owed to one or more clients / not established that lawyer held information confidential to former client / lawyer did not engage with client in a disrespectful manner / Committee’s finding of no breach reversed / unsatisfactory conduct established / lawyer directed to pay fine and costs / other respects of Committee’s decision confirmed /section 215
  9. LCRO 81/2021 PD v BN (31 August 2022) [PDF, 104 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / property matter / lawyer sent a letter of engagement via post to complainant / complainant alleges she didn’t receive the letter of engagement / complaint about the amount of fees / time records provided by lawyer missing information / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9.4 / HELD / not every breach of the rules necessarily results in an adverse finding against a lawyer / LCRO invites lawyer to consider voluntary reduction of fee as a gesture of goodwill / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  10. LCRO 49/2022 & 93/2022 WU v MQ obo CT (25 August 2022) [PDF, 277 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / appointment of trustees / complaint that lawyer did not amend will according to complainant’s instructions / lawyer ought to have recommended an assessment of complainant’s capacity by a medical professional / file notes inadequate / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 5 / Sandman v McKay [2019] NZSC 41 / HELD / complaints about lawyer not carrying out instructions are not supported on the balance of probabilities / lawyer was satisfied that complainant had sufficient capacity to understand and sign document after meeting him / penalties imposed fall away / Committee’s decision is reversed / section 211(1)(a)
  11. LCRO 188/2021 MC v JK and UV (19 August 2022) [PDF, 355 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action / relationship property proceedings / complaint lawyer took steps to recover outstanding fees by complainant / lawyer failed to follow instructions to challenge property valuation / lawyer inadequately represented complainant / no terms of engagement given to complainant / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.4 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Complaints Service and Standards Committees) Regulations 2008, regulation 29 / HELD / section 209 / Committee directed to reconsider interim distribution issue / Committee to reconsider whether fee charged was fair and reasonable / lawyer guilty of unsatisfactory conduct for failing to provide complainant information on the principal aspects of client service / other Committee findings confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  12. LCRO 121/2021 RF v DE Law on behalf of ABC Services Limited (17 August 2022) [PDF, 211 KB]

    Complaint / Committee made findings of unsatisfactory conduct / complaint lawyer failed to recognise conflict of interest / complainant not liable for lawyer’s fees / fee invoices are not fair and reasonable / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6.1 / rule 9 / HELD / matters of contractual liability are for the Courts to decide / lawyer should pursue payment of the invoices through the Court / lawyer should not have accepted instructions to act for both creditors in the same matter / lawyer ordered to pay costs to NZLS / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  13. LCRO 140/2021 TQ v RI (8 August 2022) [PDF, 185 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / litigation matter / complaint lawyer was negligent and incompetent in litigation / fees complaint / Committee determined no special circumstances to deal with the fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Complaints Service and Standards Committees) Regulations 2008, regulation 29 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act, section 138(1)(f) / HELD / arguments put forward by complainant are founded on allegations that have not been argued and decided / claim before the court represents the best opportunity for complainant to pursue his defence and seek recompense / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  14. LCRO 120/2021 SB v KR (3 August 2022) [PDF, 174 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / estate matter / complaint lawyer did not provide letter of engagement, provided poor service / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9 / Wilson v LCRO [2016] NZHC 2288 / McGuire v Manawatu Standards Committee [2016] NZHC 1052 / HELD / no breach of conduct rules regarding service or fee complaint / disciplinary response not required for not providing letter of engagement / no mischief occurred in terms of McGuire judgment / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a) 
  15. LCRO 138/2021 & 139/2021 TZ v FK and FK v TZ (26 July 2022) [PDF, 272 KB]

    Review / cross-applications / litigation / complainant applied to review Committee’s determination to take no further action on other aspects of complaint / complaint lawyer applied to review unsatisfactory conduct determination / complainant alleged lawyer’s conduct during hearing led to disadvantaged outcome for his company / lawyer’s cross-examining conduct was unprofessional and discourteous / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 138(1)(f) / section 138(2) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 13.2.1 / rule 13.8 / HELD / Committee wrongly commented on reliability and credibility of viva voce evidence in another jurisdiction / Committee wrongly inquired into complaint about lawyer’s cross-examination conduct / finding of unsatisfactory conduct reversed / decision to take no further action on complaints about lawyer’s conduct towards other parties confirmed / section 211(1)(a)  
  17. LCRO 183/2021 WB v XD (22 July 2022) [PDF, 202 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / litigation / strategy recommended by lawyer failed to sufficiently consider the instructions of the complainant/ lawyer failed to respond to communications forwarded / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 3.2 / HELD / complaint that lawyer failed to provide competent advice is not established / impossible to determine what shape the lawyer’s final submissions may have taken / lawyer’s failure to communicate with client is not sufficiently extensive to merit the imposition of a disciplinary sanction / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)  
  18. LCRO 76/2021 PJ v RK (19 July 2022) [PDF, 208 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action / trust administration matter / incompetence in administrating the trust / failed to respond in a timely manner / breached fiduciary duty and charged unreasonable fees / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 12 / section 209 / HELD / complainant’s allegations of incompetence returned to the Committee for reconsideration / Committee to reconsider complaint about fees / Committee’s decision to take no further action about emails responses and invoices confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  19. LCRO 113/2021 VN v [Area] Standards Committee [X] (27 June 2022) [PDF, 218 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / complaint lawyer missed hearing / lawyer’s request to have application recalled was dismissed / judge considered lawyer’s indication of intention to file complaint to Judicial Conduct Commission grossly discourteous / judge filed complaint with NZLS / lawyer alleged Committee misstated the situation and Committee lacked evidence to support finding / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10 / rule 12 / rule 13.2 / rule 13.2.1 / HELD / lawyer’s threat to make complaint was unprofessional and discourteous / breach of lawyer’s overriding duties as an officer of the court / Committees decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  21. LCRO 62/2021 NR v JM (16 June 2022) [PDF, 198 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / review of penalty decision / failure to keep will safe / complainant could not access late husband’s KiwiSaver / complainant was obliged to apply for probate for a copy of the will / delay in being able to meet ongoing costs caused loss of dignity and distress / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 152(2)(b)(i) / section 156(1)(b) / McGuire v Manawatu Standards Committee [2016] NZHC 1052 / HELD / lawyer censured / compensation of $10,000 to the complainant / Committee imposed $2,000 fine / costs of $1,500 to the Law Society / LCRO ordered lawyer to pay sum of $450 by way of costs of the review / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  22. LCRO 1/2021 NB v GP (31 May 2022) [PDF, 224 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action / litigation / complaint lawyer represented complainant in dispute against ACC and failed to correctly calculate the time frame for filing the complainant’s application for leave to appeal / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 12(c) / HELD / a lawyer’s failure to identify the correct time frame for filing an appeal represents a significant failing / serious breach of a lawyer’s obligation to act competently / emphasis on the importance for lawyers of ensuring compliance with statutory timeframes when representing clients in litigation is necessary / lawyer ordered to pay costs in the sum of $1,200 to the Law Society / Committee’s order reversed / section 211(1)(a)
  23. LCRO 158/2020 SA v KC (27 May 2022) [PDF, 199 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / family trust / complainant and his siblings were involved in a dispute regarding the family trust / lawyer had a meeting with complainant’s father to discuss the existing family dispute / lawyer provided a report to the family on a way forward for the family / it was agreed by the parties involved that the lawyer’s invoice will be paid out of the estate / complainant argued that the report was biased and the fees should not be charged from the estate / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9.6 / HELD / parties were free to accept or reject the proposals made in the report / parties agreed to pay the invoice as part of the Deed / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  24. LCRO 157/2020 SA v RB (27 May 2022) [PDF, 146 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / family trust / complaint lawyer had met with the complainant’s siblings to discuss property matters / complainant’s brother paid the lawyer’s invoice / lawyer addressed his invoice to the complainant without his knowledge / LCRO 31/2009 (30 April 2009) / HELD / not a matter that should attract a disciplinary response as no harm was done / liability for payment was addressed by the Deed in which the parties agreed the complainant’s brother should be reimbursed / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  25. LCRO 173/2021 KC v TG (6 May 2022) [PDF, 237 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / employment dispute / complaint opposing lawyer had acted for the complainant regarding an employment dispute / complainant had concerns about the legal fees he incurred / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 7 / rule 9.4 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 3(1)(b) / section 215 / HELD / complaint opposing lawyer should have given an indication of unbilled time / complainant should have been informed that the retainer had expanded beyond initial contemplation / complainant deprived of proper opportunity to consider his options / fee charged was not fair / Committee’s decision confirmed / lawyer ordered to pay costs in the sum of $1,200 / section 211(1)(a)