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

1407 items matching your search terms

  1. LCRO 4/2021 RQ v WJ (9 February 2022) [PDF, 161 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / complaint against Standards Committee member / complaint Committee member did not forward relevant evidence to the complainant in breach of natural justice / Deliu v Lawyers Complaints Service of the New Zealand Law Society [2012] NZHC 2582 / HELD / all complaints about a lawyer must be put to a Standards Committee / however, complaints about Complaints Service and Standards Committee members can be put to the Board of the New Zealand Law Society as well / Board may independently consider complaint / Board declined to take further action / Standards Committee member not providing regulated services / test for misconduct outside of regulated services not met / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  2. LCRO 111/2021 New Zealand Law Society v AP (10 January 2022) [PDF, 349 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / own-motion investigation following confidential report that on two occasions, lawyer inappropriately touched employees without consent / NZLS applied to review culpability determination / whether conduct should have been referred to LCDT / whether LCRO should lay charges / HELD / conduct occurred after work-related social event / constitutes conduct connected with regulated services / culpability inquiry should not generally consider external factors such as lawyer’s personal circumstances or matters unconnected with alleged breach / Committee incorrectly allowed unrelated mitigation issues to affect assessment of culpability / these factors more appropriately considered in penalty / Committee’s examination of whether force was used in incidents is incomplete / use of force requires careful and critical assessment / Committee directed to reconsider culpability for conduct without considering unrelated mitigation issues / section 209
  3. LCRO 35/2021 ZN v YM and XL (16 December 2021) [PDF, 237 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / employment proceedings / complaint lawyer A used position on board of complainant’s client to malign complainant, leading to complainant losing retainer, and advised client on area lawyer A had no experience in / complaint lawyer B implied pursuing complaint would place complainant at risk of disciplinary action, failed to inform client they may have a claim against lawyer A, and should have ceased acting until independent advice obtained / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.7 / rule 2.10 / rule 5.11 / HELD / evidence did not establish lawyer A maligned reputation, acted improperly to entice client, or acted discourteously to complainant / unlikely lawyer A could be held out as providing regulated services / inadequate basis to claim failure to inform client of possibility of claim against lawyer / no threat made / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  4. LCRO 143/2020 TJ v YY (16 December 2021) [PDF, 230 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / estates and relationship property / complaint lawyer incorrectly advised about a settlement offer and advice was disclosed without consent to other side / lawyer sought to reverse remaining orders of $3,000 fine and requirement for further training / HELD / conduct unsatisfactory / no basis to interfere with order to pay client’s costs / fine appropriate as conduct fell short of competence public is entitled to expect of a reasonably competent lawyer / further training unnecessary / problems with conduct not directly related to estate administration issues / lengthy career / LCRO confident complaints process gave lawyer pause to reflect on issues / Committee had not yet decided on name publication / Committee to be informed of review / parties can seek review of publication decision without filing formal review application or paying filing fee / Committee’s decision on training reversed / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / secti…
  5. LCRO 149/2020 WM v VE and DP (14 December 2021) [PDF, 361 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / shareholder dispute / complaint firm acted for more than one client / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6.1 / rule 8.7 / HELD / firm acted for company but also for four director-shareholders, despite lack of formal engagement of the firm by them / however little if any risk of lawyers being unable to discharge obligations to company and four director-shareholders / company controlled by those four, and reasonable to expect information provided to both / lawyers did not obtain informed consent from company and four director-shareholders to continue acting for both / breach of r 6.1.1 / no professional issues arising from lawyers’ interactions with complainant / LCRO not convinced that information about complainant and their family interests held or known by firm could, if disclosed, have been used against complainant and their family interests adversely in context of restructuring prop…
  6. LCRO 236/2020 TB - Application for review of a prosecutorial decision (13 December 2021) [PDF, 580 KB]

    Complaint / referral to Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal / own motion investigation / alleged sexual harassment and breach of alcohol policy / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 7 / section 12 / section 154 / section 158 / section 204 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10 / HELD / no need to seek Committee’s reasons for referral / conduct was unsatisfactory and capable of misconduct finding / events captured by “regulated services” / even if not, covered by other provisions / covered by r 10 / comparison with prior Committee decision of no assistance / alcohol consumption could have compromised safety of clients, staff or others / conduct of a sexual nature could potentially be misconduct / visiting adult store with female clerks / inappropriate touching / “flirty” emails to more junior solicitor / facts of one instance disputed, appropriate for Tribunal to assess conduct / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 21…
  7. LCRO 178/2021 AA v EL (26 November 2021) [PDF, 256 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / civil dispute / complaint lawyer’s memorandum to court contained racist and discriminatory references, offensive impressions, and racial bias / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 1.2 / HELD / lawyer owed limited duties and obligations to complainant, as complainant was not their client / did not misrepresent complainant’s views to the court / reference to complainant’s ethnicity and profession could not be reasonably or sensibly interpreted as evidence of lawyer behaving unprofessionally or discourteously / no disrespect in describing complainant’s specific stance about litigation / comments not racist simply because complainant feels they are racist / comments would not be racial harassment under 2021 amendments to Rules / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  8. LCRO 13/2021 ZW v HN (25 November 2021) [PDF, 250 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / censure and $10,000 fine / civil litigation / complaint lawyer failed to draft and file proceedings within appropriate time frame, allowing other party to advance Limitation Act defence / HELD / lawyer did not seriously challenge unsatisfactory conduct finding / contended penalties were unduly harsh / lawyer displayed casual indifference to obligation to advance and protect client’s interests / conduct at the high end of unsatisfactory but did not reach threshold for referral to Disciplinary Tribunal / censure was not unreasonable or disproportionate / lawyer failed to act on client’s instructions for a long time and was oblivious to requests for updates and explanations for delay / delay approached unconscionability / length of delay, lawyer’s indifference to advancing client’s case, and unconvincing explanations for conduct support argument for significant fine / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  9. LCRO 8/2021 CK v SE (23 November 2021) [PDF, 284 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / family trust / complaint lawyer requested other side’s lawyer not to provide information to their client until condition was met / did not respond to other side’s letter in a timely fashion / later responded directly to them / breached undertaking to provide separate letter / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10.1 / rule 10.2 / rule 12 / HELD / letter not intended for other lawyer to breach their duties to their client / rule 12 did not apply / lawyer’s statement about separate letter not an undertaking / time taken to respond to other side inexcusable but no adverse finding / neither lawyer nor other lawyer had been acting for their former clients, so no breach of rule 10.2 / allegation of Committee’s bias not made out / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  10. LCRO 80/2021 A LN and B LN v QG (9 November 2021) [PDF, 265 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action / employment proceedings / complaint fees were excessive / lawyer provided final invoice late / lost data relating to client file / did not keep client properly informed about costs / allowed personal issues to dominate certain client communications / Privacy Act 2020, section 22, Information Privacy Principle 5 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9.1 / rule 9.6 / HELD / LCRO could not determine whether lawyer managed document and email management systems efficiently / unreasonable delay in providing final invoice / personal issues did not excuse obligations to clients / Committee overlooked delay before COVID-19 lockdown / additional aggravating delay after Alert Level 2 restrictions began / fees fair and reasonable for work undertaken / Committee’s decision modified to find breach of rule 9.6 / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  11. LCRO 173/2020 AZ v BX and CX (1 November 2021) [PDF, 178 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / sale of mortgage / complaint lawyer’s actions resulted in mortgage securing advances to trust being extinguished / HELD / lawyer’s firm providing administrative services to trust did not convert to professional duty of loyalty to trust / lawyer had no duty to advise trustees of proposed sale of mortgage by firm’s nominee company / lawyer not acting in their own interests when acting for nominee company on sale / unwarranted burden on lawyers if they are required to consider what conduct another party to a transaction could engage in due to the transaction, and to advise other clients of the firm if such potential conduct could adversely affect their interests / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
  12. LCRO 58/2021 EW v YL (29 October 2021) [PDF, 187 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / residential property transfer / complaint lawyer acted for both parties in transaction, that complainant was unwell, that complainant had not signed transfer documents, that lawyer did not advise complainant of potential steps following discovery of forged signature, and that complainant incurred significant loss attempting to rectify matters / complainant unsatisfied with Standards Committee compensation order / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 156(1)(d) / HELD / despite lawyer’s actions and omissions, it cannot be established that complainant would not have proceeded with the transaction had those actions or omissions not taken place / inadequate evidence on complainant’s lack of capacity / appropriate to award compensation for impact of the transaction / Committee’s decision modified to impose $3,000 fine in addition to fine imposed by Standards Committee / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  13. LCRO 43/2021 CAT Ltd v ZEN Lawyers Ltd (28 October 2021) [PDF, 217 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / insurance / complaint lawyer and firm provided advice to complainant without instructions following initial meeting / lawyer passed away, Committee amended complaint to exclude lawyer and focused on firm instead / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 121(1) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / HELD / lawyer operated on the understanding that they had received instructions to provide advice to complainant / lawyer’s position supported by evidence of other lawyers from firm / absence of specific reference to complainant providing instructions in file note not evidence that no instructions were provided / complainant had not established on the balance of probabilities that either lawyer or the firm had breached its obligations and duties to them / possibility of genuine misunderstanding between complainant and lawyer / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  14. LCRO 131/2020 JG v ZN (27 October 2021) [PDF, 160 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / enduring powers of attorney (EPOA) / complaint lawyer witnessed person’s signature on EPOA and provided certificates without ascertaining whether person had appropriate mental capacity to understand the EPOA / Protection of Property and Personal Rights Act 1988, section 93B / Sandman v McKay [2019] 1 NZLR 519 (SC) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.5 / rule 2.6 / HELD / presumption under PPPRA means lawyer did not need to seek medical assessment of person prior to signing of the EPOA / no evidence supporting a view that lawyer’s certificates were not a true record of advice provided to person / no direct evidence that person’s statements were enough to put lawyer on notice that person lacked capacity to understand the effects and implication of the EPOA / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  15. LCRO 172/2020 CA v PL (14 October 2021) [PDF, 174 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / property sale and purchase / complaint about lawyer’s lack of communication, “misinformation”, and fees / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9 / HELD / no evidence lawyer did not understand rules for property transactions during COVID-19 lockdown / client was abusive and difficult to act for, lawyer kept communication to a minimum and was to be commended for continuing to act / lawyer’s fees “more than” reasonable / not unreasonable for lawyer to secure fees prior to carrying out work necessary to complete settlement / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  16. LCRO 208/2020 & LCRO 214/2020 JA v RR and RR v JA (8 October 2021) [PDF, 233 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / property transaction / complaint lawyer continued to be involved in client’s family’s affairs, decision should be published, client should be compensated, and lawyer should be prohibited from involvement in matters / review application by lawyer challenging penalties and in response to complainant’s application / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 156(1)(i) / Wislang v Medical Council of New Zealand [2002] NZCA 39 / Daniels v Complaints Committee 2 of the Wellington District Law Society [2011] 3 NZLR 850 / Workington v Sheffield LCRO 55/2009 (26 August 2009) / J v NZ Psychologist Board HC Wellington AP 34/01 (11 July 2001) / HELD / LCRO cannot stop lawyer representing client or being involved with trusts / no evidence requiring further compensation / Committee fine modest for conduct breaches, but no reasons to interfere / anonymised publication serves public interest / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  17. LCRO 36/2020 SW v LN (4 October 2021) [PDF, 172 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / family law proceedings / complaint lawyer engaged in various forms of criminal conduct, failed to follow instructions, and other allegations / HELD / lawyer advised client and followed instructions / client considers lawyer to be part of conspiracy to conceal perjury by other party to proceedings / lawyer had good cause to terminate retainer due to client’s criticisms and allegations, indicating client had lost confidence and trust in lawyer / lawyer’s advice on proceedings was sound and conventional when contrasted with approach client insisted on / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  18. LCRO 139/2020 MX v RJ and DJ (30 September 2021) [PDF, 252 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / estate administration / complaint lawyers, as executors of the estate, failed to promptly invest proceeds from sale of property at appropriate interest rate, lawyers’ fees were excessive, lawyers failed to communicate with trustees over placement of sale funds and sale of property, and lawyers contributed to delay in settling sale of property / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 132 / section 111(1) / section 114 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / HELD / lawyers’ decision not to invest sale proceeds in higher-interest account reasonably made and within their discretion / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  19. LCRO 107/2021 NG v WF and OE (29 September 2021) [PDF, 176 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / estate administration / complaint lawyer failed to forward settlement proposal to executors / HELD / matter had been dealt with through Early Resolution Process / sufficient indication from complaint that Committee needed to seek response from lawyers / lawyer overlooking email with settlement offer and sending response eight weeks after receipt not enough to warrant disciplinary action in the circumstances / no evidence delay caused prejudice or loss / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  20. LCRO 73/2020 A and B WT v CV and DU (29 September 2021) [PDF, 185 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action / conveyancing transaction / complaint lawyer failed to advise vendor that Body Corporate was required to certify disclosure statement and provided poor service / Unit Titles Act 2010 / Lawyer and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / New Zealand Law Society Property Law Section Guidelines / HELD / Committee took no further action on the basis lawyers had discounted fees, but inquiry must consider whether disciplinary response required / financial loss appropriately addressed in other forums / reasonable to expect lawyer would carefully explain disclosure regime / failure to provide appropriate advice constitutes unsatisfactory conduct in terms of s 12(a) and breach of rule 3 / $2,000 fine ordered / Committee’s decision modified to reflect findings, otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  21. LCRO 43/2020 SL v DN (29 September 2021) [PDF, 231 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / property dispute / complaint lawyer acted for two clients in conflict of interest / also, did not respond in timely manner / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6.1 / rule 6.1.1 / rule 6.1.3 / HELD / lawyer did not obtain prior informed consent / lawyer continued acting for one client while advising the other they needed independent legal advice / did not formally consent to lawyer continuing to act for other client / no disciplinary finding required / lawyer did not act for complainant / lawyer required complainant to seek independent legal advice / lawyer did not advance one party’s position against the other’s interests / complainant’s new lawyer had not complained about lawyer’s delay / Committee breached natural justice principles by denying lawyer opportunity to make submissions prior to determination / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
  22. LCRO 215/2020 YY v RN (27 September 2021) [PDF, 207 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / residential property sale and purchase / complaint lawyer failed to ensure assignment of earthquake claim from vendor to purchaser completed / HELD / Complaints Service did not correctly identify subject of complaint / Standards Committee should have considered the role of other lawyer initially contacted by complainant / insufficient evidence to establish either respondent or other lawyer breached duties to complainant / time between subject matter of complaint arising and date of complaint makes it difficult to investigate complaint / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  23. LCRO 91/2019 CL v BK and AM (31 August 2021) [PDF, 328 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / conveyancing transaction / complaint lawyers failed to competently advise on risks and issues related to the transaction, and that one lawyer failed to supervise the other during the retainer / Property Transactions and E-dealing Practice Guidelines (July 2012) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 11.3 / HELD / sale and purchase agreement signed before retainer commenced / evidence does not demonstrate lawyers did not act competently regarding risks / lawyer alleged to require supervision was an associate with the firm / degree of supervision required lessens as lawyer gains experience and the confidence of partners / no breach of rule 11.3 / negligence claim must be pursued in civil court / Committee’s decision reversed as to unsatisfactory conduct finding for breach of rules 3 and 11.3 and consequential orders / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  24. LCRO 14/2021 PR and [Law Firm A] v [Area] Standards Committee [X] (30 August 2021) [PDF, 143 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / trust account / own-motion complaint lawyer permitted another lawyer to use their trust account to facilitate transactions, receiving referral fee payment / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 5.9 / HELD / review of penalty / Committee ordered $5,000 fine / no set formula to calculate appropriate fine / receiving collateral reward a serious matter / lawyer should only profit from reasonable fee, not from collateral matters / lawyer motivated by genuine desire to assist young colleague / fine reduced to $2,000 / Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a) and (b)
  25. LCRO 189/2020 ZK v XM (30 August 2021) [PDF, 168 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action / criminal proceedings / complaint lawyer did not follow instructions to claim legal aid and did not competently represent client at trial / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 3.4A / rule 9.5 / HELD / retainer initiated on basis client privately instructed lawyer / at first meeting, lawyer provided partially completed legal aid application form / client returned form via email but lawyer overlooked email and lost track of legal aid discussions / both parties had some responsibility to follow up / client paid invoices without objection / allegation by client that lawyer said legal aid was declined only supported by inconsistent account / no other supporting evidence / in context, error not sufficient to necessitate disciplinary finding / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)