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

1424 items matching your search terms

  1. 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)
  2. 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)
  3. 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)
  4. 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)
  5. 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)
  6. 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)
  7. 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)
  8. 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)
  9. 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)
  10. 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)
  11. 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)
  12. 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)
  13. 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)
  14. 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)
  16. LCRO 97/2019 DH v MB (29 June 2020) [PDF, 273 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / settlement of estate dispute / complaint lawyer did not act competently preparing complaintant’s mother’s will to protect family property from claims / Davis v Mancer [2015] NZHC 3005 / SY v LT LCRO 1/2018 (December 2019) / JR v ST LCRO 57/2015 (December 2016) / Family Protection Act 1955 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 351 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / HELD / certain conduct occurred more than six years before 1 August 2008, no jurisdiction / non-clients are owed limited duties / no evidence produced that lawyer failed to advise complainant’s mother to protect her property from relationship property/family protection claims / allegations of negligence must be tested in civil courts / Committee’s decision modified to record that any further action on the complaint is unnecessary or inappropriate / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 2…
  17. LCRO 195/2018 KW v LQ (26 June 2020) [PDF, 182 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / criminal representation / complaint lawyer did not account for money, made erroneous comments about Legal Aid Service and another lawyer, and brought the profession into disrepute / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 200 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2 / rule 9.5 / rule 10 / rule 11 / HELD / lawyer misrepresented role of legal aid lawyer to client’s overseas family / erroneously minimised credentials of legal aid lawyer / breach of section 12(b), unacceptable and unprofessional conduct / client’s interests compromised as lawyer then withdrew services due to non-payment of fees / trust account records issue not addressed by Standards Committee / issue returned to Standards Committee / section 209 / Committee’s decision reversed as to orders / censure and costs ordered / section 211(1)(a)
  18. LCRO 202/2018 HB v MD (26 June 2020) [PDF, 172 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / responsibility for invoices regarding mortgage defaults / complaint lawyer falsely asserted complainant was in default of mortgage, and issued two invoices complainant was not responsible for / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 12(a) / HELD / lawyer relied on client’s advice as to the facts when issuing one erroneous invoice / mistake quickly acknowledged, isolated error / no breach of section 12(a) / liability for other invoice currently before the courts / no evidence of breach of professional standards / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  19. LCRO 164/2019 SM v NL (25 June 2020) [PDF, 150 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / family court proceedings / complaint lawyer acted against former client / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 8.7 / rule 8.7.1 / Torchlight Fund No 1 LP (in rec) v NZ Credit Fund (GP) 1 Ltd [2014] NZHC 2552 / HELD / no particularised evidence of how lawyer breached rule 8.7.1 / no evidence of professional standards issue / no evidence of lawyer holding confidential information which, if disclosed, would likely affect the interests of former client / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  20. LCRO 90/2019 WP v MB (23 June 2020) [PDF, 186 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / sale and purchase of commercial property / complaint lawyer breached undertaking / delay in providing lease documents / Auckland Standards Committee 3 v W [2011] 3 NZLR 117 (HC) / W v Auckland Standards Committee 3 [2012] NZCA 401 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10.3 / HELD / undertaking said lease documents would be provided on completion of settlement / lawyer did not search files in response to inquiries / provided documents 5 weeks later / breach of rule 10.3 / Committee’s decision reversed / $1,000 fine and costs ordered / section 211(1)(a)
  22. LCRO 174/2018 GL v TE (18 June 2020) [PDF, 296 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / trust dispute / complaint lawyer had a conflict of interest and did not adequately administer trust/ Lawyers and Conveyancers (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 8.7.1 / HELD / complainant consented to lawyer acting for trust/ no evidence of disclosure of client information that would adversely affect complainant / complainant may apply to High Court to compel lawyer to perform trustee duties / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  23. LCRO 2/2018 MC v TL (17 June 2020) [PDF, 304 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / paternity and custody proceedings / complaint lawyer did not act competently, accept instructions, or act in a timely manner / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 3.4 / rule 3.5 / rule 4 / rule 4.1 / rule 4.1.3 / HELD / no rule requiring either client or lawyer to sign terms of engagement / no evidence lawyer did not act competently / time taken to advance matters does not call for disciplinary response / lawyer could have advised client that separate proceedings to recover costs would not be required / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  24. LCRO 84/2020 WF v BP (11 June 2020) [PDF, 159 KB]

    Jurisdiction / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / whether application lodged out of time / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 198 / Epidemic Preparedness Act 2006, schedule 2 / D v T LCRO 36/2009 (27 March 2009) / LCRO 190/2017 (6 November 2017) / KX v WA LCRO 84/2012 (30 April 2012) / 30 working day time limit / discretion to extend time limit / whether LCRO a tribunal / HELD / no reason to extend time limit / application for review lodged out of time / LCRO has no jurisdiction to consider application