Search Results

1. LCRO 212/2016 LM v HR (22 September 2017) [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...Mr LM refused to accept Ms HR’s undertaking and followed the directive in Guideline 2.55, which provides: A lawyer should not seek, accept or need to rely on an undertaking from a non- lawyer. The paramount concern for the lawyer must be the protection of the interests of the client concerned. Undertakings given by lawyers can be and are enforced by a Court under its inherent jurisdiction arising from the fact that lawyers are officers of the Court. Conveyancing practitioners are n...

2. Auckland Standards Committee 5 and Southland Standards Committee v Taia [2022] NZLCDT 17 (9 June 2022) [pdf, 244 KB]

   ...services.18 [22] The Standards Committee seeks an order striking off the practitioner, the most severe penalty order. We are obliged to consider the least restrictive outcome. The correct approach is described in Daniels:19 Tribunals are required to carefully consider alternatives to striking off a practitioner. If the purposes of imposing disciplinary sanctions can be achieved short of striking off then it is the lesser alternative that should be adopted as the proportionate resp...

3. DA v EB LCRO 7/2013 (3 December 2014) - Penalty and Costs [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...August 2014 in which findings of unsatisfactory conduct were made against Ms DA pursuant to s 12(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act) in respect of six breaches of the Act, the Trust Accounts Regulations, and the Conduct and Client Care Rules made under the Act. [2] Ms DA was ordered to cancel her fees to Ms EB, and refund $2,117.24, which she and Ms EB say she has done. [3] Both parties were invited to tender submissions with respect to penalty orders and costs...

4. MOJ0614_SEP21_WEB.pdf [pdf, 73 KB]

   Responding to a Protection Order For people responding to a Protection Order (or an application for a Protection Order) made against them You might have been served with (given) a Protection Order or been told someone (the applicant) has applied for a Protection Order against you. If you’ve been served with a temporary Protection Order, it means the Court decided it was urgently needed by the person who applied, to protect them from family violence. You must keep to the Protection Orde...

5. LCRO 26/2019 ET v CG (29 January 2021) [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...[1] Mr ET has applied for a review of the determination by [AREA] Standards Committee [X] to take no further action in respect of his complaint about Mr CG. Background [2] Mr ET had separated from his former partner, Ms YO. [3] A temporary Protection Order had been issued by the court against Ms YO, which, inter alia, stipulated that “… she must not … without the protected person’s express consent, enter or remain on any land or building occupied by any protected person...

6. LCRO 229/2017 and 021/2018 VL v YN (8 May 2019) [pdf, 257 KB]

   ...property which we sold we are now homeless. Devon VL did not act in accordance to her duties of care for us as clients. Devon VL did not act competently, in a timely manner or in accordance with instructions received. Devon VL did not act to protect or promote our interests. Devon VL did not treat us fairly. Mr CA’s submissions [18] Ms VL instructed Mr CA QC to act for her with regard to the complaint. Mr CA submitted that it would be appropriate for the Committee to take no...

7. [2020] NZIACDT 22 - NJUM v VOLE (2 June 2020) [pdf, 137 KB]

   ...breach of cl 1 of the Code (being professional) and of cl 31(a) (not providing false documentation to a visa officer). [18] Furthermore, it was found that Mr Vole had breached a number of other Code obligations: (1) He lacked diligence and due care in filing applications without the necessary documents, in breach of cl 1; (2) He failed to provide to the complainant written confirmation of material discussions with her, in breach of cl 26(c); and (3) He failed to provide to the...

8. Flewitt v New Zealand Law Society [2014] NZLCDT 64 [pdf, 43 KB]

   ...restore his professional practice and function an admirable goal in his recovery overall. In these terms I find no medial [sic] or psychiatric or psychological impediment to him functioning to his legal qualification. Prognostically, he seems very well protected by his motivation principally, his loving and stable relationship with Jackie and their children, his healthy lifestyle and a general attunement and vocational achievement in addictions care.” [22] In relation to the offending...

9. Guest v New Zealand Law Society [2009] NZLCDT 16 [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...particular mention of the dim view taken of argument put by the Law Society to support the abandonment of an undertaking given. We pay careful regard to those words, but do not consider they apply in the present instance. The information sought to be protected was in fact protected to the extent of the assurances which were given. We categorise those assurances as an undertaking meaning that the assurances were solemnly given and were intended to be relied upon. [16] In his s...

10. BORA Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill [pdf, 125 KB]

    27 April 2012 ATTORNEY-GENERAL LEGAL ADVICE CONSISTENCY WITH THE NEW ZEALAND BILL OF RIGHTS ACT 1990: PARENTAL LEAVE AND EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION (SIX MONTHS’ PAID LEAVE) AMENDMENT BILL 1. We have considered whether the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill (‘the Bill’) is consistent with the rights and freedoms affirmed in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (‘the Bill of Rights Act’). The Bill was introduced into the House...