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:
1346 items matching your search terms
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / purchase of land subject to easement / complaint complainants purchased land with no benefit to them / request for compensation / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 156(1)(d) / HELD / potential future losses not compensable / time and energy in complaints process not compensable / complainants committed to purchase before instructing lawyer / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / lease renewal / complaint lawyer acted beyond instructions and did not seek payment from landlord for lawyer’s fees / Hunstanton v Camborne LCRO 167/2009 (10 February 2010) / Chean v Kensington Swan HC Auckland Civ-2006-404-1047, 7 June 2006 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9 / rule 9.1 / HELD / no evidence of professional standards issue / focus of complaint is on landlord’s failure to cover fees / fees reasonable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined jurisdiction as complaint res judicata / lawyer’s nominee company’s compliance with regulations / review application on the basis Committee wrong to determine it had no jurisdiction / HELD / standing / complainant does not have sufficient personal interest to support complaint / substance of complaint has been addressed / further action on complaint not necessary or appropriate / section 211(1)(b)
Review / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / estate administration / complaint lawyer opposed beneficiary in family protection claim and did not provide information / fee complaint / lawyer sole executor and trustee of estate / Administration Act 1969, section 26 / Family Protection Act 1955, section 11 / Hunstanton v Cambourne LCRO 167/2009 (February 2010) / Re Murphy’s Settlements [1998] 3 All ER 1 / Jemma Trust Co Ltd v Liptrott [2003] EWCA Civ 1476 / HELD / although best practice, lawyer not required to provide bill of costs to complainant in these circumstances / lawyer’s involvement in family protection claim and payments to third parties from estate, in executor capacity / section 211(1)(b) / Committee directed to determine fee complaint / section 209(1)(a) / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / conveyancing transaction settlement / complaint lawyer’s conduct created impression settlement could not take place / Court of Appeal determined lawyer’s conduct conveyed impression problem had not been solved / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 10 / rule 10.1 / rule 11 / rule 11.1 / Fair Trading Act 1986 / BC v YT LCRO 215/2010 (April 2011) / RP v LP LCRO 292/2011 (October 2012) / JW v QE LCRO 192/2011 (September 2012) / R v D LCRO 56/2009 / HELD / breach of rule 10 and rule 10.1 / failed to advise problem solved / Committee’s decision modified to record breach of rule 10 and rule 10.1 and contravention of section 12(c) / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / employment dispute / complaint opposing lawyers committed crimes during proceedings / HELD / review application an attempt to relitigate employment dispute / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / Commerce Commission investigation / complaint lawyer alleged breaches of consumer law / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10.1 / rule 13 / rule 13.8 / rule 13.8.1 / rule 13.8.2 / Medcalf v Weatherill [2002] UKHL 27 / Schmidt v Pepper New Zealand (Custodians) Ltd [2012] NZCA 565 / submissions were requests for inquiry, not allegations of criminal offending / rule 13.8 requires allegations of reprehensible conduct to have reasonable grounds, not concrete evidence / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
(See also minute dated 30 October 2019, decision dated 29 November 2019 and decision as to publication dated 17 February 2020)
Date of decision: 29 November 2019 (See also list of evidence, minute dated 30 October 2019 and decision as to publication dated 17 February 2020).
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / enforcement proceedings / complaint lawyer failed to competently represent client and terminated retainer without good cause / Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Castles [2013] NZLCDT 53 / LCRO 262/2014 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 4.1 / rule 4.2 / rule 4.2.1 / HELD / evidence does not demonstrate inadequate representation / not task of Standards Committee or LCRO to provide overarching supervision of litigation strategies / lawyer did not have capacity to attend to charging order, which required urgent response / fully informed client and received instructions to transfer file / retainer ended by consent / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / protection order / complaint lawyer did not provide adequate final account and exceeded estimate / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 7.2 / rule 9 / rule 9.3 / rule 9.4 / rule 9.6 / rule 9.7 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Trust Account) Regulations 2008, regulation 9 / regulation 10 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 110 / HELD / no evidence estimate was provided or that lawyer failed to provide invoice / final account met rule 9.7 / breach of rule 7.2 / did not provide information on request / lawyer stated they may withdraw discount offered if information request was sustained / Committee’s decision modified to record breach of r 7.2 / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / Family Court proceedings / complaint lawyer failed to protect interests and act in accordance with fiduciary duties / fee complaint / Family Court set aside relationship property agreement / Committee ordered $150,000 fee refund / Property (Relationships) Act 1976, section 21 / P v H LCRO 02/2009 / TJ v DM LCRO 261/2016 / HELD / elements of joint complaint vexatious / evidence does not support allegations in complaint / Committee may not order refund exceeding fees paid / lawyer kept client informed and provided competent advice / no evidence of assurances that costs position was secure / retainer uncertain with litigation risk / no further action on fee complaint as joint complaint vexatious / section 211(1)(b) / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / conveyancing matter / complaint lawyer did not competently advise on due diligence / pre-1 August 2008 conduct / Law Practitioners Act 1982 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 351 / Woods v Legal Complaints Review Officer [2013] NZHC 674 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / HELD / advice on conveyancing was a breach of rule 3 / Committee’s decision modified to record unsatisfactory conduct pursuant to sections 12(a) and 12(c) / section 211(1)(a)
Date of decision: 31 October 2019.
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / drafting will and structuring property ownership / complaint lawyer drafted defective will / pre-1 August 2008 conduct / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 351(1) / HELD / no evidence of professional standards issue / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / contractual advice / complaint lawyer was negligent when advising on contractual appointment / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 7 / rule 7.1 / HELD / lawyer failed to advise there was a potential for dispute regarding contractual appointment / no further penalty / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / litigation representation / complaint lawyer failed to keep client informed / whether lawyer has a duty to advise they will be unable to complete retainer due to resignation / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 7.1 / HELD / lawyer failed to advise client they had resigned from firm / breach of rule 7.1 / apology / Committee’s decision modified to record unsatisfactory conduct pursuant to sections 12(a) and 12(c) / section 211(1)(a)
Date of minute: 30 October 2019 (see also list of evidence, decision dated 29 November 2019 and decision as to publication dated 17 February 2020)
Date of minute: 30 October 2019 (See also decision dated 30 January 2020)
Review / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / relationship property agreement / complaint lawyer failed to accurately calculate funds available to client on settlement of property sale / whether lawyer provided competent service / whether lawyer ensured client understood calculations / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 7 / rule 7.1 / Daniels v Complaints Committee 2 of the Wellington District Law Society [2011] 3 NZLR 850 (HC) / Workington v Sheffield LCRO 55/2009 (26 August 2009) / HELD / lawyer failed to calculate net proceeds of sale accurately / did not ensure client understood calculations / $2,500 fine / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / dealing with bankrupt client’s funds / complaint lawyer did not disclose funds held on trust for bankrupt client to Official Assignee, and used funds to pay firm’s and barrister’s outstanding fees / Insolvency Act 2006 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 110 / whether firm held a lien over funds / whether lawyer entitled to rely on belief partner had approval from Official Assignee / HELD / lawyer acted without due care in contravention of Insolvency Act 2006 / Committee’s decision confirmed / reversed as to considering whether to publish practitioner’s name / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / relationship property proceedings / widely-cast complaint that lawyers failed to act competently / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Client Care and Conduct) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 9.1 / whether Committee reviewed fee complaint correctly / HELD / no evidence of professional standards issue / brief reasons for conclusions on fee review insufficient in the circumstances / Committee did not appoint cost assessor / Committee to reconsider fee complaint / section 209(1)(a) / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / protection order proceedings / complaint lawyer was rude to client, pressured client into settling, and included a clause in an undertaking without instructions / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.1 / rule 7.1 / rule 12 / rule 13.3 / whether lawyer was discourteous / whether lawyer protected client’s interests / HELD / no evidence of professional standards issue / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / professional discipline proceedings / complaint lawyers not competent, and conflicted with insurer / R and N Family Trust v EL LCRO 205/2015 (27 June 2019) / Nicholson v Icepak Coolstores Ltd [1999] 3 NZLR 475 (HC) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 6 / rule 6.1 / whether lawyers had sufficient understanding of case before providing advice / HELD / lawyers provided competent representation / no evidence that lawyers were conflicted / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / dispute with council and retailer / complaint lawyers acted in excess of instructions / failed to provide client care information / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Client Care and Conduct) Rules 2008, rule 3.4 / rule 3.6 / rule 9 / rule 9.1 / whether lawyers were instructed to act and on what basis / HELD / no evidence of professional standards issue / legal services to be provided covered by retainer and subsequent instructions / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)