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

1345 items matching your search terms

  1. Faleauto v DE LCRO 99/2015 (29 November 2016) [PDF, 101 KB]

    Mr Faleauto has applied for a review of a direction to publish his name, in the context of a summary of facts, outcome, and orders following Mr DE’s complaints about his conduct and service. The direction was made by the X Standards Committee X, pursuant to s 142(2) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act), with the prior approval of the Board of the New Zealand Law Society (NZLS) given on [Date] 2015, pursuant to reg 30 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Complaints Service and Standards Committee) Regulations 2008 (the Committee Regulations).
  2. CR v TN LCRO 54/2014 (23 November 2016) [PDF, 75 KB]

    Lawyer issued proceedings personally against another lawyer and his client alleging maintenance / champerty, abuse of process, unlawful conspiracy to injure and defamation. The other lawyer had previously complained about the first lawyer, and those complaints were part of charges brought against the first lawyer before the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal. The complainant (second lawyer) alleged the first lawyer had commenced proceedings for the purpose of intimidating him and his client, and to gain discovery of his files. Standards Committee agreed, and found unsatisfactory conduct by reason of breach of r 2.3 CCCR ( legal processes to be used for proper purposes only.) Committee also found breaches of rr10 and 13.2. Applicant argued that the CCCR did not apply because he was not providing regulated services. LCRO agreed the lawyer was not providing regulated services, but CCCR apply according to their terms - EA v ABO LCRO 237/2010 applied. LCRO reversed finding of un…
  3. SW on behalf of COMPANY 1 v RG, OL and HJ LCRO 130/2014 (3 November 2016) [PDF, 105 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint lawyer incompetent / inadequate supervision / misleading court / conflict of interest / failure to respond to client / fees complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 5.11 / rule 13.5 / GL v UE LCRO 206/2010  (21 October 2011) / HELD / Office not correct forum for some complaints / fees fair and reasonable / breach of rule 5.11 / unsatisfactory conduct /  Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)
  5. EA v NR LCRO 130/2015 (31 October 2016) [PDF, 174 KB]

    Mrs EA has applied for a review of a decision by the [Area] Standards Committee dated 8 June 2015 in which the Committee found there had been unsatisfactory conduct on the part of Ms NR. The Committee imposed consequential orders under s 156(1) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act) ordering Ms NR to pay compensation of $5,000 and apologise to Mrs EA, pay costs of $1,000 to the New Zealand Law Society (NZLS) and reprimanding her.
  7. KY v DZ LCRO 174/2015 (25 October 2016) [PDF, 76 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / relationship property and custody dispute / complaint over serving documents at workplace / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 10.2 / rule 12 / communicating directly with another lawyers client / respect and courtesy to third parties / HELD / no direct communication / serving documents caused embarrassment / breach of rule 12 / unsatisfactory conduct /  Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
  18. UK v WM LCRO 144/2013 (2 September 2016) [PDF, 104 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint about statements in article / criticism of judiciary / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 section 138(1)(c) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 2 / rule 2.8 / rule 10 / LP v CS LCRO 170/2011 obligation to report a lawyer / context of comments / vexatious complaint / HELD / comments part of public debate / no conduct issues / complaint vexatious / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  20. UK v VL LCRO 142/2013 (2 September 2016) [PDF, 257 KB]

    Complaint/ Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint about statements in article / criticism of judiciary / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 section 138(1)(c) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 2 / rule 2.8 / rule 10 / LP v CS LCRO 170/2011 obligation to report a lawyer / context of comments / vexatious complaint / HELD / comments part of public debate / no conduct issues / complaint vexatious / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
  22. ZA v YB LCRO 164/2013 (31 August 2016) [PDF, 93 KB]

    Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint over delay in uplifting files / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 / rule 4.4 / rule 4.4.1 rule 10 / rule 10.3 / treating other lawyers with courtesy and respect / urgency in obtaining files / communication with former client / HELD / no undue delay in providing files / proper to communicate with former client to confirm instructions / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)