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 / separation agreement / applicant became liable for a tax bill / complaint lawyer provided incorrect advice / Limitation Act 1950 / HELD / lawyer raised Limitation Act issues with the client / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / separation agreement / applicant became liable for a tax bill / complaint lawyer provided incorrect advice / Limitation Act 1950 / HELD / lawyer raised Limitation Act issues with the client / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / care of children / applicant not client of lawyer / complaint that lawyer had conflict of interest / threatened applicant / acted inconsistently with instructions / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.7 / rule 12 / respect and courtesy / HELD / lawyer did not issue a threat / no evidence to support complaints / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / care of children / relocation of child / psychologist’s report / termination of retainer / complaint lawyers gave poor advice / did not advise on prospect of success / failed to supervise junior lawyer / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 4 / rule 4.1 / rule 11.3 / D v S [2002] NZFLR 116 (FC) / duty to accept instructions / HELD / lawyers acting on instructions / lawyers obliged to inform court that retainer had been terminated / supervision of employees adequate / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / lawyer had been suspended from practice / complaint that lawyer provided poor service / increased fees / HELD / complaints vague / no evidence to support allegations / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / criminal charges / transfer of legal aid / lawyer needed authority from client needed to uplift files / complaint lawyer terminated retainer without good cause / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 4.1 / HELD / complaints process used inappropriately / lawyer terminated retainer for good cause / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / property purchase / sale of business / fee complaint / 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 9.1 / whether fees exceeded quote / HELD / each fee relates to a separate matter / fees do not exceed $2,000 / Office does not have jurisdiction to consider complaints about fees below $2,000 / Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / preparation of loan and security documents / failure to advise whether loans were commercial or consumer loans / failed to supervise legal executive / legal executive witnessed signatures on unprepared forms / Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.5 / rule 3 / rule 3.1 / rule 7.1 / rule 11.3 / Gilbert v Shanahan [1998] 3 NZLR 528 (CA) / conduct prior to 1 August 2008 / HELD / lawyers had a responsibility to explain the differences between consumer and commercial loans to respondent / legal executive sought advice from the lawyers / conduct finding against legal executive reversed / lawyers failed to supervise legal executive properly / Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / property purchase / complaint lawyer did not provide GST advice / Goods and Services Tax Act 1985, section 21A / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 1.2 / rule 3 / whether GST advice was part of retainer / HELD / GST adjustment rules not well known at the time / reasonable to expect lawyer to suggest client seek accountancy advice / content of memorandum was not professional / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / respondent prepared asset division agreement / respondent inserted additional terms into agreement / breach of Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6.1 / rule 6.1.1 / rule 8.7.1 / conflict of interest / lawyer acting against former clients / HELD / lawyer had voluntarily refunded fees and apologised / no other penalty orders are appropriate / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
14 November 2018 Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / own motion investigation by Committee / lawyer claimed a lien over former client’s passport / Passports Act 1992, section 33 / Vallant Hooker & Partners v Proceedings Commissioner [2001] 2 NZLR 357 (HC) / Xu v Council of the Law Society of New South Wales [2009] NSWCA 430, (2009) 236 FLR 480 / SM v TK LCRO 124/2014 (31 January 2018) / HELD / retaining passports is conduct lawyers of good standing would find unacceptable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Date of decision: 12 November 2018. This is an addendum/correction to the original decision dated 21 September 2018.
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct against B / both B and O lawyers / employment dispute / complaint B used legal processes for improper purposes / lacked respect and courtesy / misled the court / complaint O communicated directly with B’s client / O used the complaints process for an improper purpose / Employment Court Regulations 2000, regulation 42 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.3 / rule 10.2 / rule 13.1 / rule 13.2 / rule 13.3 / rule 13.9.3 / proper standards of professionalism / litigation tactics / HELD / B’s litigation tactics do not amount to bullying / no evidence that B’s conduct was inappropriate or that B made threats / no evidence that B used legal processes for improper purposes / B was acting on instructions / Committee’s decision reversed with regards to B’s conduct / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / ACC dispute / claim struck out / lawyer terminated retainer / complaint lawyer failed to follow instructions / failed to use critical information / Naysmith v Accident Compensation Corporation [2006] 1 NZLR 40 (HC) / EM v Accident Compensation Corporation [2015] NZHC 971, [2015] NZAR 909 / whether client provided lawyer with critical information / HELD / lawyer was acting on client’s instructions / client did not provide lawyer with critical information / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / settlement of a business dispute / complaint lawyer did not protect their client’s interests / failed to act competently / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 9 / whether agreement fit for purpose / HELD / agreement provided dispute resolution processes / representation competent / fees fair and reasonable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / sale and purchase of property / complaint lawyer improperly registered a caveat against the title / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.3 / rule 13.2.1 / rule 13.9.1 / rule 13.9.4 / Moevao v Department of Labour [1980] 1 NZLR 464 (CA) / Ridehalgh v Horsefield [1994] Ch 205 (CA) / use of legal processes for improper purpose / abuse of process / HELD / lawyer was not acting for applicant / caveat lodged for proper purpose / no basis for complaint / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / liquidation of companies / lawyer instructed by liquidator / complaint that lawyer disclosed privileged or confidential information / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 13 / rule 13.2.1 / rule 13.9.1 / rule 13.9.4 / discovery obligations / duty to treat others involved in the court process with respect / HELD / lawyer was not acting for applicant / discovery involved large amounts of material / lawyer did not lack respect for applicant’s privacy / nothing more the lawyer could have done / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / will dispute / fee complaint / practitioner deceased / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 205 / HELD / not possible for Office to comply with rules of natural justice / impossible to progress review / LCRO declines to make any further inquiry / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / will dispute / applicant estate beneficiary / complaint lawyer provided incorrect advice / incorrectly recorded time spent on file / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9 / rule 9.1 / third party duties / HELD / limited duties owed to third parties / applicant not a client of the lawyer / not entitled to know advice given to executors / no evidence to support allegations / fees fair and reasonable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / relationship property dispute / contracting out agreement / complaint agreement did not protect the client / Property (Relationships) Act 1976, section 21 / Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Evesham LCRO 138/2009 (5 November 2009) / conduct prior to 1 August 2008 / HELD / no evidence to support allegations / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Date of decision: 15 October 2018
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / property purchase / lawyer prepared sale and purchase agreement / complaint handled by Committee’s Early Intervention Process / HELD / significantly more information received on review / Committee directed to reconsider complaint / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a) DT(OV)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / lawyer acted for legally aided client / client terminated retainer / lawyer did not appear in court / Court required lawyer to seek leave to withdraw as counsel and an explanation their non-attendance / lawyer wrote a memorandum to the court highly critical of client / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10 / rule 13 / rule 13.8 / proper standards of professionalism / lawyer’s duty not to attack reputation / HELD / lawyer must inform the Court if the retainer is terminated / content of memorandum was not professional / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / purchase of a property / clients used KiwiSaver funds / funds paid to clients / breach of undertaking given to bank / KiwiSaver Act 2006, schedule 1, rule 8 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10.3 / W v Auckland Standards Committee 3 of the New Zealand Law Society [2012] NZCA 401, [2012] NZAR 1071 / HELD / undertakings should be adhered to / funds should have been returned to the bank / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / administration of estate / dispute between executors / joint instructions / lawyer acted for the estate / complaint lawyer acted when there was a conflict of interest between executors / failed to provide a letter of engagement / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.4 / rule 6.1 / rule 9.1 / HELD / lawyer only acted on joint instructions / lawyer’s duties were to the estate / lawyer voluntarily reduced fees / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)