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

1138 items matching your search terms

  1. 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)

  2. 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)

  3. 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)

  4. 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)

  5. 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)

  6. 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

  7. LCRO 196/2019 FL v ND (8 June 2020) [PDF, 123 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / unsuccessful private prosecution regarding breach of suppression order / complaint lawyer breached suppression order and misled the court / HELD / not role of Standards Committee to construct complaint against lawyer / Standards Committee not the appropriate forum to determine whether lawyer breached suppression order / issue cannot be relitigated through complaints process / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)

  8. LCRO 22/2019 HT v MK (29 May 2020) [PDF, 326 KB]

    Review / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / sale of a business and shares / complaint lawyer made errors in share sale agreement, failed to make inquiries and disclose information, and went on leave causing delay / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 1.2 / rule 1.6 / rule 3 / rule 7 / rule 7.1 / rule 9 / rule 9.1 / rule 10 / Hunstanton v Cambourne and Chester LCRO 167/2009 (February 2010) / HELD / allegations of negligence must be tested in civil courts / share sale agreements ultimately used were in draft form, still subject to revision / lawyer advised client they would be on leave / delays not untimely / lawyer not culpable for not taking steps after instructions withdrawn / Committee did not analyse fee complaint adequately / Committee’s decision to take no further action on fee complaint reversed / fee complaint referred back to Committee / section 209(1)(a) / Committee’s decision otherwise confirme...

  9. LCRO 79/2019 PS v NR (28 May 2020) [PDF, 193 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / Family Court proceedings / complaint lawyer instructed self-represented litigant to communicate directly with their client in breach of protection order / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 12 / rule 12.1 / Burgess v Tait [2014] NZHC 2408 / Chapman v Legal Complaints Review Officer [2015] NZHC 1500 / HELD / lawyer volunteered to pass on emails to the client in court, then withdrew that offer later / either insincere, or discourteous and unprofessional to cease forwarding emails and advise to deal with lawyer’s client directly, without prior discussion with complainant and notification to the court / as complainant unrepresented, should have informed her of her right to take legal advice / by finest margin, no adverse finding made / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)

  10. LCRO 2/2019 RCN and OCN as Trustees v MA, JS, LB and GD (27 May 2020) [PDF, 189 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / advice to trustees and construction contract dispute / complaint lawyers did not act competently or protect the trust’s interests, did not complete matters in a timely way, and improperly terminated retainer / Construction Contracts Act 2002 / HELD / basis of complaint and disciplinary process is to maintain professional standards, not loss recovery / client requested lawyers establish a trust, and lawyers provided competent advice on the trust / lawyers were only consulted intermittently throughout development project, and without enough time to issue a payment schedule / litigation strategy pursued to establish a basis for settlement / trust partially succeeded in construction contract dispute / lawyers did not lack competence or diligence / lawyer terminated retainer appropriately due to conflict of interest between trustee company and other trustees / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)

  11. LCRO 144/2018 BG v NH (26 May 2020) [PDF, 140 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / criminal and immigration matters / complaint barrister accepted direct instructions / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 14.4 / HELD / lawyer received fees in advance / accepted direct instructions / consent is no answer to taking direct instructions / penalty / $500 fine ordered on review / Committee’s decision modified to reflect fine / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)

  12. LCRO 34/2018 GR v [Area] Standards Committee [X] [PDF, 199 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / registration of easements, lodging caveat / complaint lawyer registered and certified instruments without Authority and Instruction consent / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.5 / Property Transactions and E-Dealing Practice Guidelines / Land Transfer Act 1952, section 164A / HELD / breach of rule 2.5 / lawyer certified they had authority to register instruments without such authority / penalty / censure, fine of $6000, direction to provide decision to Registrar-General of Land, costs confirmed / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)

  13. LCRO 46/2016 Richard Zhao v Yu Sun and Li Wang (7 May 2020) [PDF, 133 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / lodging a caveat / complaint lawyer did not pass on Notice for Lapse of Caveat to client / review stayed pending civil proceedings / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 6 / HELD / breach of rule 3 and rule 6 / lawyer’s firm listed as address for service on caveat / assumed and failed to discharge duty to clients to advise them of notices in relation to caveat / Committee’s findings that lawyer concealed fact that caveat had lapsed, not supported by evidence / compensation / client lost choice to take advice on acting to sustain caveat or allowing it to lapse / $1,000 compensation / penalty / fine reduced from $5,000 to $4,000 as no finding lawyer concealed error, costs order confirmed / Committee’s decision partially reversed, partially modified / section 211(1)(a)

  14. LCRO 162/2019 SD, JK and DZ v RE (5 May 2020) [PDF, 92 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / fee recovery proceedings / complaint lawyer appeared as counsel in proceedings in which the lawyer was giving evidence and their conduct was in issue, and committed perjury / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 13.5.3 / HELD / lawyer sought leave to appear which was granted by court / evidential conflict supporting perjury complaint for District Court to resolve / no right of appeal to LCRO on perjury allegation / complaint discloses no reasonable cause of action / application for review struck out / section 205(1)(a)

  15. LCRO 180/2018 & 186/2018 KM on behalf of XYZ Trust v DF (5 May 2020) [PDF, 159 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / civil proceedings / complaint lawyer was incompetent as to ensuring full discovery from defendant, and lied to the court when seeking to be removed as counsel of record / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Complaints Service and Standards Committees) Regulations 2008, regulation 29 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 12(a) / HELD / failure to take steps to require discovery better characterised as a lack of diligence in terms of section 12(a), than a lack of competence in terms of rule 3 / lawyer entitled to put their view to the court regarding withdrawing as counsel of record / penalty / fine of $2000, costs confirmed / no costs order for review / Committee’s decision modified to reflect lack of diligence rather than lack of competence / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)