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

1371 items matching your search terms

  2. LCRO 054/2017 VM v CR (31 July 2017) [PDF, 176 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / relationship property dispute / client complained about fees / fees held to be fair and reasonable / lawyer commenced proceedings to recover fees / complaint that lawyer breached agreement not to commence proceedings / Auckland Standards Committee 3 of the New Zealand Law Society v W [2011] 3 NZLR 117 (HC) / whether lawyer breached undertaking not to commence proceedings / HELD / Committee and LCRO do not have the power to order a lawyer to withdraw proceedings / undertaking not provided / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  3. LCRO 162/2015 and 66/2016 IA v CMR (31 July 2017) [PDF, 253 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / own motion investigation / liquidation of companies / lawyer acting for client and clients parents / conflict of interests / failure to ensure parties had independent legal advice / inadequate terms of engagement  / poor communication / failure to confirm instructions / fees not fair and reasonable / breach of  Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6 / rule 6.1 / rule 7 / rule 7.1 / rule 11.3 / whether client was agent of parents / HELD / act has focus on consumer protection / lawyer should have communicated directly with parents / fees not fair and reasonable / publication ordered / Committee’s decision otherwise modified / section 211(1)(a)
  4. LCRO 60/2017 NV v GW (31 July 2017) [PDF, 191 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / relationship property dispute / mediated settlement / lawyer had not initially acted for client / complaint lawyer had not acted in clients best interests / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.4 / rule 9 / rule 9.4 / whether fee estimate had been provided / HELD / lawyer acted according to instructions / estimate not provided / fees fair and reasonable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  5. LCRO 099/2016 IJ v KL (28 July 2017) [PDF, 225 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / relationship property agreement / complaint lawyer failed to follow instructions / failed to keep client informed / withheld correspondence / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section  110(1)(b) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.4 / rule 3.5 / rule 7 / rule 7.1 / rule 7.2 / rule 9 / rule 9.1 / HELD / fees fair and reasonable / lawyers acting on clients instructions / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  9. LCRO 247/2015 TL v CS (19 July 2017) [PDF, 240 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / debt recovery proceedings / disclosure of confidential information / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 8.7.1 / whether personal characteristics is confidential information / duties to former clients / HELD / lawyer had not acted for former client for many years / any insights would no longer be accurate / no confidential information / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
  10. LCRO 260/2013 CS v RV (18 July 2017) [PDF, 190 KB]

    Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / dispute over estate / client legally aided / lawyer had not managed employee’s conduct / failed to manage practice / lack of timeliness in providing services / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 11 / rule 11.3 / HELD / insufficient evidence on issue of timeliness  and supervision / breach of rules 3 and 11.3 reversed / fine reduced / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  12. LCRO 330/2013 PR v RW (17 July 2017) [PDF, 148 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / unsuccessful criminal appeal / complaint lawyer retained a vehicle / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9.6 / final accounts / whether fees were to be paid by legal aid / HELD / not enough evidence to support fee complaint / complaints about vehicle not suitable for the Office to determine / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  16. LCRO 68/2017 GM v BN (6 July 2017) [PDF, 219 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / purchase of a business / lawyers acted for the vendor / refusal to return deposit / complaint lawyer breached undertaking / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10.3.2 / lawyer holding funds as stakeholder / whether agreement cancelled / HELD / complaints process not an alternative to court proceedings / the Office is not the correct forum for the dispute / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  18. LCRO 382/2013 SC v JT (30 June 2017) [PDF, 193 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / email contained threat to lay complaint against another lawyer / improper use of complaints process / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.7 / rule 2.10 / UF v OU LCRO 90/2011 (20 March 2013) / improper purpose / HELD / complaints process not to be used to enforce a legal right / email not sent for improper purpose / lawyer had sought advice from senior practitioner / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
  19. LCRO 47/2017 KD: Review of a prosecutorial decision (30 June 2017) [PDF, 180 KB]

    Committee determined that conduct be considered by Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal / overpayment on money into trust account / trust account obligations / failure to follow instructions / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 158 / Lawyers and Conveyancers (Trust Accounts) Regulations 2008, regulation 12 / Orlov v New Zealand Law Society [2013] NZCA 230, [2013] 3 NZLR 562 / VX and VXZ v North Island Standards Committee LCRO 126/2012 (5 June 2013) / HELD / Standards Committee not obliged to provide reasons for laying charges / laying of charges justified / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  20. LCRO 3/2016 RC and RD v ZC (30 June 2017) [PDF, 123 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / purchase of a business / complaint lawyer failed to act competently / respond in a timely manner / did not provide required information / unreasonable fees / respect and courtesy / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 3.1 / rule 3.2 / rule 3.4 / rule 9 / rule 10.1 / RQ and RR v MZ LCRO 127/2011 (2 October 2012) / CW v XB LCRO 213/2010 (15 June 2011) / HELD / lawyers errors not at level of unsatisfactory conduct / lawyers should have explained matters more clearly to clients / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  22. LCRO 128/2015 GBA v HCB (29 June 2017) [PDF, 197 KB]

    Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / property purchase / lawyers exchanged undertakings / applicant did not honour undertaking to release funds on the same day / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10.3 / Auckland Standards Committee 3 of the New Zealand Law Society v W [2011] 3 NZLR 117 (HC) / Auckland Standards Committee  v Stirling [2010] NZLCDT 4 / FY v UM LCRO 239/2010 (26 October 2011) /  HELD / lawyers must honour all undertakings / breach of rule 10.3 / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  23. LCRO 130/2016 RB v ZB (28 June 2017) [PDF, 229 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / relationship property dispute / complaint lawyer of undue delay in providing files / file notes had been removed or destroyed / lawyer acted inappropriately / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 4.4.1 / rule 3.4 / rule 12 / Wilson v Legal Complaints Review Officer [2016] NZHC 2288 / uplifting files / HELD / delay in uplifting files unsatisfactory conduct / no evidence to support allegation material was removed from file /  Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)
  24. LCRO 95/2013 GI v JM (28 June 2017) [PDF, 255 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / relationship property dispute / complaint that nothing had been achieved / lawyer had not acted in clients best interests / excessive fees / conflict of interest / Lawyers and Conveyancers (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9.1 / HELD / no conflict of interest / lawyer progressed matters as was practicable / no unreasonable delays / costs ordered against lay applicant / fees fair and reasonable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  25. LCRO 243/2013 ZAA v YBC (27 June 2017) [PDF, 267 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / dispute between business partners / lawyer acted for both parties / complaint of conflict of interest / failure to follow instructions / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6 / rule 6.1 / rule 7 / rule 8 / rule 8.7 / Taylor v Schofield Peterson [1999] 3 NZLR 434 (HC) / Sandy v Khan LCRO 181/2009 (9 December 2009) /  HELD / lawyer do not insist each party get independent legal advice / no informed consent / breach of rule 6 and 6.1 / unsatisfactory conduct / not enough evidence to determine instructions were not followed / Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)