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

1370 items matching your search terms

  1. LCRO 55/2020 MY v KA (5 October 2020) [PDF, 182 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / conveyancing transaction / complaint lawyer misspelt client’s name on title and did not follow instructions to correct mistake / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 11 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 137 / section 138 / complainant asked to withdraw complaint / HELD / complainant’s wishes on progressing complaint not determinative / when complainant asks to withdraw complaint, Committee’s role is to weigh request against public interest requirements / breach of rule 3 / failed to act in a timely way to correct mistake and disregarded instructions to do so / breach of rule 11 / responses to complaint and inquiry failed to preserve reputation of legal profession / Committee’s decision modified as to scope of rule 11 breach, otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  2. LCRO 24/2019 UC v SO (30 September 2020) [PDF, 156 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / criminal proceedings / complaint lawyer did not return memory stick and did not give invoice for cash payment of fees / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.4A / rule 14.2 / rule 14.10 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Trust Account) Regulations 2008, regulation 9 / regulation 10 / Skagen v Wellington Standards Committee [2016] NZHC 1772 / HELD / breach of rule 3.4A / no evidence terms of engagement provided / breach of rule 14.2(e), rule 14.10, and regulations 9 and 10 / no evidence invoices sent / memory stick complaint resolved by Disputes Tribunal / Committee’s decision confirmed but modified to conditionally increase fine / section 211(1)(a)
  3. LCRO 5/2020 AJ v BN (30 September 2020) [PDF, 263 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / conveyancing transaction / complaint lawyer failed to advise on land covenants, did not act in a timely manner and did not promptly address internal complaint / Burgess v Tait [2014] NZHC 2408 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 3.8 / rule 5.11 / rule 7 / rule 7.1 / HELD / breach of rules 3, 7 and 7.1 / lawyer admitted they failed to advise about land covenant / however, breaches do not call for a disciplinary sanction / no professional standards issue with internal complaint process / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  4. LCRO 104/2020 LN v RT (30 September 2020) [PDF, 127 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / family proceedings / complaint opposing party’s evidence was incomplete and lawyer provided false certificate / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.5 / rule 12 / HELD / lawyer obliged to protect and promote their client’s interests / materials suggest that court was satisfied with opposing party’s affidavit / no evidence of professional standards issue / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  5. LCRO 158/2018 YCH v TSR (30 September 2020) [PDF, 396 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / estate administration / complaint lawyer administered estate to benefit one beneficiary, and provided beneficiaries with advice when their interests conflicted / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6 / rule 6.1 / rule 6.1.2 / rule 12 / Hartlepool v Basildon LCRO 79/2009 / Sadler v Public Trust [2009] NZCA 364 / Hansen v Young [2004] 1 NZLR 37 (CA) / HELD / lawyer objectively advised beneficiaries until recommending they obtain independent legal advice / breach of rules 6 and 6.1 / realised estate asset to the benefit of one beneficiary / breach of rule 12 / did not keep other beneficiaries informed of progress on realising estate / Committee’s decision modified to reduce fine, reversed as to fee refund / Committee directed to reconsider whether entire fees fair and reasonable / section 211(1)(a)
  6. LCRO 72/2020 ZW v CB (29 September 2020) [PDF, 204 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / civil dispute / complaint lawyer was incompetent, provided negligent advice, breached duty of care, and provided poor service / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 9 / rule 9.1 / HELD / lawyer provided competent representation throughout retainer / advised on options and kept complainant informed / fees fair and reasonable having regard to relevant fee factors / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  7. LCRO 162/2018 BQ v XR (29 September 2020) [PDF, 267 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / relationship property matter / complaint lawyer unnecessarily edited settlement agreement and provided incompetent advice / fee complaint / Property (Relationships) Act 1976 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 9 / rule 9.1 / Hunstanton v Cambourne LCRO 167/2009 / HELD / breach of rules 9 and 9.1 / significant amount of work billed neither productive nor necessary / little achieved when retainer terminated / unsatisfactory conduct found pursuant to sections 12(a) and 12(c) / Committee’s decision confirmed but modified to reduce fee reduction / section 211(1)(a)
  8. LCRO 63/2020 SJ - Application for review of a prosecutorial decision (28 September 2020) [PDF, 124 KB]

    Committee referred conduct complaint to Disciplinary Tribunal / allegation of permitting another lawyer to operate practice using lawyer’s trust account in breach of certificates / FF v Wellington Standards Committee LCRO 23/2011 / Orlov v New Zealand Law Society [2013] NZCA 230 / HELD / matter needs to be considered in forum appropriate for issues / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  9. LCRO 16/2020 PF v VJ (22 September 2020) [PDF, 243 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / franchise dispute / complaint opposing lawyer falsely issued and improperly served notice of breach, delayed responding, and made personal remarks / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.3 / rule 10.2 / rule 12 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Complaints Service and Standards Committees) Regulations 2008, regulation 29 / HELD / complaint about notice of breach is a contractual dispute for the courts, complaints process is not an alternative forum / notice of breach served directly on represented complainant in compliance with exception at rule 10.2.6 / no evidence of disrespectful correspondence / no delay in responding / no special circumstances to inquire into fee complaint / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  10. LCRO 182/2017 TP v ZN (14 September 2020) [PDF, 414 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / civil proceedings and insurance settlement / complaint lawyer provided inadequate client care information, supervised incurring expert witness expenses without instructions, continued to negotiate settlement against instructions, and disclosed privileged information / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 209 / section 333 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.4 / rule 7.1 / rule 8 / rule 8.1 / rule 8.3 / rule 9.8 / rule 9.10 / rule 13.3 / HELD / breach of rule 3.4 / client care information wrong / breach of rules 8, 8.1 and 13.3 / instructing experts is a significant decision for rule 13.3, but responsible lawyer was not disciplined by Committee so adverse finding reversed / lawyer disclosed instructions to court and continued negotiations with insurer against instructions / unsatisfactory conduct found pursuant to s 12(c) / Standards Committee directed to reconsider complaints about …
  12. LCRO 18/2020 MP v LT (31 August 2020) [PDF, 202 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / civil proceedings / complaint lawyers’ fees exceeded estimate and award did not merit expenditure / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9.1 / rule 9.4 / HELD / fee quickly exceeded estimate / instructions changed after estimate / Committee did not adequately address whether complainant should have been informed of escalating fees / lawyer named as party in complaint did not render invoice / Committee directed to reconsider which lawyer should be the subject of complaint, whether information on escalating fees was required, and a fair and reasonable fee amount / section 209 / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
  13. LCRO 210/2018 RF v TG (27 August 2020) [PDF, 231 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / employment proceedings / complaint lawyer’s representation incompetent and fees not fair and reasonable / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 9 / rule 9.1 / LCRO 262/2014 (28 June 2018) / Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Castles [2013] NZLCDT 53 / McGuire v New Zealand Law Society [2017] NZHC 2484 / Vallant Hooker & Partners v Toothill HC Auckland CIV-2009-404-1895, 4 September 2009 / Chean v Luvit Foods International Ltd HC Auckland CIV 2006-404-1047, 7 June 2006 / HELD / complaints process does not closely scrutinise each litigation decision / breach of rule 9 / lawyer should have formed view at outset as to prospects and costs / no evidence lawyer advised costs could exceed any award or of Calderbank offer meaning / fee calculated by reference to time recorded / no measured assessment of whether fee was reasonable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  14. LCRO 103/2020 ZA - Application for review of a prosecutorial decision (24 August 2020) [PDF, 212 KB]

    Committee referred conduct complaint to Disciplinary Tribunal / allegation lawyer sent message enabling contractor to avoid GST and income tax obligation / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2 / Orlov v New Zealand Law Society [2013] NZCA 230 / Zhao v Legal Complaints Review Officer [2016] NZHC 2622 / HELD / current own motion inquiry, arising out of a previous determination that did not consider the matter, is not an abuse of process or relitigation of the issue / review application of previous determination did not make findings on the issue / review of prosecutorial discretion involves LCRO considering fairness of the substance and process of Committee’s determination / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  15. LCRO 203/2017 HI v JK (6 August 2020) [PDF, 314 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / criminal proceedings / complaint lawyer not competent, terminated retainer improperly, and did not correctly manage funds received / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.1 / rule 3 / rule 4.2 / rule 14.10 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 110 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Trust Account) Regulations 2008, regulation 9 / regulation 10 / Skagen v Wellington Standards Committee [2016] NZHC 1772 / HELD / taking cash without issuing an invoice may have been a conduct breach but does not merit disciplinary response / breach of rule 4.2 / did not clearly advise retainer terminated / did not attend court / unsatisfactory conduct found pursuant to sections 12(a), 12(b) and 12(c) / Committee’s decision reversed to reflect rule breach / lawyer ordered to cancel and refund fee / section 211(1)(a)
  16. LCRO 235/2018 AB v CD (5 August 2020) [PDF, 149 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / civil proceedings / complaint opposing lawyer improperly pursued statutory demand and fees not fair and reasonable / duties to third parties / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9 / Companies Act 1993, section 290 / indemnity for fees / HELD / lawyer acted on client instructions / no breach of rule 9 / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  17. LCRO 34/2020 KL v OP (4 August 2020) [PDF, 147 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / trust and family matters / complaint lawyer failed as independent trustee / Hansen v Young [2004] 1 NZLR 37 / PY v SD LCRO 217/2017 (26 March 2018) / Rules of Professional Conduct for Barristers and Solicitors, rule 1.04 / section 201 / HELD / no authority to direct mediation with ex-partner as they are not a party to the review / complaint relates to lawyer’s role as trustee / no evidence of professional standards issue / application for review an abuse of process / application for review struck out / section 205(1)(d)
  18. LCRO 77/2020 MP v RJ (30 July 2020) [PDF, 194 KB]

    Complaint / Committee determined to take no further action on complaint / proceedings under Retirement Villages Act 2003 / complaint lawyer failed to comply with discovery obligations, threatened complainant and failed to respond to requests / second complaint / no further action taken on first complaint, Committee referred complainant to presiding judge / LO v RT LCRO 202/2017 (4 February 2019) / HELD / second complaint repeats aspects of first complaint and attempts to relitigate issue / opportunity to have concerns about lawyer behaviour during proceedings addressed by court is not affected by lawyer’s withdrawal as counsel / fresh correspondence alleged to be threatening merely robustly presents client’s position / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  19. LCRO 91/2020 LS v DV (29 July 2020) [PDF, 178 KB]

    Complaint / Committee determined to take no further action on complaint / third registered mortgage extinguished by power of sale / complaint lawyer involved in transaction cannot provide current trustees with details of how the trust lost its mortgage security / P v H LCRO 02/09 (20 March 2009) / LCRO 112/2013 (30 August 2013) / Attorney-General v O’Neill [2007] NZHC 1526 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 192A / section 138(1)(c) / HELD / lawyer did not act for trustees or trust / not lawyer’s responsibility to maintain trust’s records / application for review is vexatious / application for review struck out / section 205(1)(c)
  20. LCRO 172/2019 CB v HM (29 July 2020) [PDF, 112 KB]

    Complaint / Committee determined to take no further action on complaint / civil proceedings regarding subdivision / complaint lawyer’s conduct during litigation was unsatisfactory/ Siemer v Legal Complaints Review Officer HC Auckland CIV-2010-404-986, 25 February 2011 / LCRO 42/2020 (7 July 2020) / RCN v MA LCRO 2/2019 (27 May 2020) / A v New Zealand Law Society [2017] NZHC 1712 / HELD / not the role of disciplinary process to scrutinise and validate submissions and evidence in court proceedings / no evidence of recklessness to mislead the court / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  21. LCRO 73/2019 LM v NO (27 July 2020) [PDF, 224 KB]

    Review / Committee determined to take no further action on complaint / relationship property proceedings / complaint opposing lawyer acted for two clients in one matter when their interests did not align / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6.1 / HELD / lawyer’s clients have not expressed concern but complainant has sufficient interest in the complaint for inquiry to proceed / lawyer prepared draft proceedings and gave advice against existing client, contrary to that client’s interests / while both shared a view on the subject of proceedings, their interests were not aligned / client cannot instruct a lawyer to act against their own interests / technical breach of rule 6.1 / appropriate to exercise discretion not to make an adverse finding in these circumstances / Committee’s decision confirmed but modified to reflect breach of rule 6.1 / section 211(1)(a)
  22. LCRO 206/2018 JA v CL (22 July 2020) [PDF, 168 KB]

    Complaint / Committee determined to take no further action on complaint / relationship property matters / complaint opposing lawyer failed to comply with agreements, made unsubstantiated allegations and attacks, did not respond to communications in a timely manner, was unprofessional and failed to correct a mistake / HELD / lawyers owe limited duties to non-clients / client’s decisions are not the lawyer’s / no evidence of professional standards concern / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  23. LCRO 3/2019 YR v OS (20 July 2020) [PDF, 207 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct/ trust and relationship property matters / complaint lawyer failed to explain trustee duties and provide competent advice, failed to inform trustee they had been removed as a trustee, and acted for more than one client / provided advice to both husband and wife / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 12(a) / HELD / review of liability determination / lawyer must be proactive in offering advice or ensuring independent advice / lawyers can owe fiduciary duties to non-clients / no evidence lawyer provided wife with advice regarding significance of family home being owned by a trust (taking it outside of relationship property pool) or of power of appointment and removal of trustees and the associated risks if marriage ended / breach of fiduciary duty / Committee’s decision confirmed but modified to include further unsatisfactory finding conduct pursuant to section 12(c) for rule breaches related to fiduciary duties / section 211(1)(a)
  24. LCRO 87/2019 G OR v F HM (10 July 2020) [PDF, 259 KB]

    Review / Committee determined to take no further action on complaint / will and estate matter / complaint opposing lawyer requested confidential information from lawyer / Carter Holt Harvey Forests Ltd v Sunnex Logging Ltd [2001] 3 NZLR 343 (CA) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 8.1 / rule 8.1.1 / rule 8.7 / rule 8.8 / HELD / duties to non-clients / any duty of confidence owed to complainant would have to arise outside a lawyer-client relationship / no evidence of connection or relationship with complainant or their lawyer giving rise to a duty of confidence / no breach of rule 8.8 / Committee’s decision confirmed but modified to provide further action is unnecessary or inappropriate / section 211(1)(a)
  25. LCRO 176/2019 LJ v RY and PG (7 July 2020) [PDF, 230 KB]

    Complaint / Committee determined to take no further action on complaint / breaches of franchise agreement / complaint lawyers’ advice was negligent and that fees were excessive and no estimate was provided/ fee complaint / Auckland Standards Committee No 3 v Castles [2013] NZLCDT 53 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 9 / rule 9.1 / rule 9.4 / HELD / complainant defaulted on various obligations when instructing lawyers / no right or wrong approach to litigation strategy / test for unsatisfactory conduct involves competence and diligence / no evidence of professional standards issue regarding advice / complainant did not request an estimate / although Committee did not appoint a costs assessor, it would have been reasonable for lawyers to consider an uplift in the circumstances of the retainer / this mitigates complaint that fees rendered were excessive / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)