Search Results

1. LCRO 32/2022 QP v ZH (28 March 2023) [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...basis of other complaints: • Costs incurred for placing funds on term deposit and for preparing statements. Mr QP speculates that the funds may not have been placed on deposit. 3 • Potential breach of r 10.2 of the Conduct and Client Care Rules.1 • [Law firm K] was conflicted when it continued to act for Ms WO on her personal matters, including the purchase of another property. [Law firm K] response [13] [Law firm K] responded under the hand of two of its direct...

2. [2015] NZEmpC 194 Tuala v Linfox Logistics (N.Z.) Ltd [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...subject to such conditions, including conditions as to the giving of security, as the Court thinks fit to impose. [20] In Duncan v Osborne Buildings Ltd, the Court of Appeal stated in relation to an application for stay: 2 … [I]t is necessary carefully to weigh all of the factors in the balance between the right of a successful litigant to have the fruits of a judgment and the need to preserve the position in case the appeal is successful. Often it is possible to secure an int...

3. LP v MT LCRO 74/2013 (22 October 2014) [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...different proposition from that which formed the basis of Ms LP’s first offer. [43] Ms LP’s first offer was for $175,000 and that was the price accepted by the mortgagee in the Agreement which was finally signed. However, the benefits and protections of the first offer were not included in the offer as accepted and consequently the value to Ms LP was substantially reduced. [44] If, as suggested by Ms NQ in her email to Ms LP dated 29 November, it was possible for the mortgag...

4. Legal Complaints Review Officer v Morrison [2018] NZLCDT 40 [pdf, 339 KB]

   ...is well known that the Disciplinary Tribunal’s penalty function does not have as its primary purpose punishment, although orders inevitably will have some such effect. The predominant purposes are to advance the public interest (which include “protection of the public”), to maintain professional standards, to impose sanctions on a practitioner for breach of his/her duties, and to provide scope for rehabilitation in appropriate cases. Seriousness of the offending [3] The starting...

5. EA v WSC2 LCRO 11 / 2011 (24 June 2011) [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...changed. DECISION Background [1] On 18 September 2008, the New Zealand Law Society received a confidential report from a practitioner written in terms of Rules 2.8 and 2.9 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008. In that report, the practitioner advised the Society that he had reasonable grounds to suspect that the Applicant had been guilty of misconduct or unsatisfactory conduct. [2] The report arose primarily as a result of litigati...

6. [2021] NZIACDT 18 - CL v Khetarpal (10 August 2021) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...it, uphold it but take no further action or uphold it and impose one or more sanctions.5 [36] The sanctions that may be imposed by the Tribunal are set out in the Act.6 The focus of professional disciplinary proceedings is not punishment but the protection of the public.7 [37] It is the civil standard of proof, the balance of probabilities, that is applicable in professional disciplinary proceedings. However, the quality of the evidence required to meet that standard may differ...

7. Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Harder [2022] NZLCDT 29 (23 August 2022) [pdf, 150 KB]

   ...and proper person, or otherwise unsuited to be a lawyer?4 1 Therefore, subject to s 7(1)(a) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (LCA). 2 Therefore, subject to s 7(1)(b) LCA. 3 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008. 4 This is the threshold required to reach the level of “misconduct” under s 7(1)(b)(ii) 3 [4] The last question raises issues about how transitory the fit and proper assessment...

8. Part 1 Application legal aid lawyer [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   ...Civil Criminal Provider Approval Level 1 Criminal Provider Approval Level 2 Criminal Provider Approval Level 3 Criminal Provider Approval Level 4 Family Mental Health Māori Land Court and Māori Appellate Court Waitangi Tribunal Refugee and Protected Persons Court of Appeal and Supreme Court Employment Advocate I’m applying for approval in the following specified legal services: Duty Lawyer   Police Detention Legal Assistance (PDLA)   Family Legal Advice Service (FLAS)...

9. [2021] NZIACDT 10 - YC v Wan (19 May 2021) [pdf, 238 KB]

   ...explanation. [28] Mr Gu advised the Authority on 15 December 2020 that the complainant had been granted a s 61 visa on 7 January 2020. She had spent $5,010 to regularise her status under the s 61 process and $1,850 for an appeal to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal. The total cost of $6,860 would not have occurred but for Ms Han’s misconduct. There was also the loss of wages for the period from 22 August 2019 to 6 January 2020 when she was an overstayer. The complainan...

10. Barfoot & Thompson Ltd v CAC302 & Ors [2016] NZREADT 22 [pdf, 176 KB]

    ...Committee [14] On 24 February 2015 the Committee found that the appellant agency had engaged in unsatisfactory conduct by not following its own procedures, or the requirements of Rule 10.7 of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012 relating to discovery of defects. Subsequently, on 22 June 2015 the Committee fined the Agency $2,500 and ordered that it reimburse the complainants for their legal costs of $1,178.75 and $1,322.50. [15] The Committee...