Search Results

1. Mansfield v Southwell LCRO 199 / 2010 (8 September 2010) [pdf, 133 KB]

   ...against” element appears to reside in the Applicant‟s overall contention that the entire restructuring proposal was set up in contemplation of her failure, with the aim of depriving her of her property and transferring it to T. [31] I have carefully considered the evidence, the submissions made by the Applicant's counsel and also the principles set out in Black v Taylor. and counsel‟s various submissions concerning the risks involved in a lawyer‟s use or disclosure of...

2. LCRO 119/2018 QL v DW (22 October 2019) [pdf, 164 KB]

   ...action on the complaint was necessary or appropriate. [17] In reaching that conclusion, the issue identified by the Committee for consideration was whether, as required by rule 3 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules), Mr DW acted for Mr QL “competently and consistently with [Mr DW's] duty to take reasonable care”. (1) Relationship property calculations [18] The Committee referred to Mr DW’s calculations on which he b...

3. LCRO 191/2019 UY v FB (26 November 2020) [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...conduct of the respondent, Ms FB. Background [2] Mr UY is engaged in proceedings that are before the Family Court. [3] Ms FB acts for the opposing party. [4] In the course of the Family Court proceedings, Mr UY filed an application for a protection order. 2 [5] In submissions responding to that application, Ms FB described Mr UY’s application, as an application for variation of a parenting Order “in drag”. [6] Ms FB was required to file a memorandum with the court....

4. Family Court Rewrite Submission - Paul von Dadelszen QSO [pdf, 268 KB]

   ...addition, the FDR service should be answerable to the Ministry of Justice and the Family Court; such would be appropriate if it is truly to be a part of that strengthened Family Justice Service. 2 Focus on children 6. Q1: Section 61 of the Care of Children Act 2004 (COCA) should be re- enacted. In my experience, it encapsulated those matters which are relevant to the safety of the child, particularly as it includes s.61(i). 7. Q2: There should be automatic (computerised)...

5. LCRO 83/2020 BA v SC (18 December 2020) [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...of regulated services (not being a contravention that amounts to misconduct under [s] 7)”.8 [42] The professional duties that bind lawyers when acting for clients are contained in the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules) which, as the name suggests, concern the way in which lawyers must (a) conduct themselves, and (b) act for their clients. [43] Although the Rules, which expand on lawyers’ fundamental obligations, do not rep...

6. LCRO 24/2017 HC v DASH (24 January 2020) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...concluded that the lawyer or his or her practice are able to make use of the membership to the advantage of the client; or (c) the lawyer’s ability to advise the client properly and independently is compromised. [40] Consistent with the consumer protection purposes of the Act and lawyers’ fundamental obligation to protect clients’ interests, r 6 requires that:3 [i]n acting for a client, a lawyer must, within the bounds of the law and [the rules], protect and promote the inte...

7. Proposals against incitement of hatred and discrimination - discussion document [pdf, 408 KB]

   Proposals against incitement of hatred and discrimination Public discussion document Contents Introduction from the Minister of Justice ............................................................................ 3 Summary of proposals ........................................................................................................ 4 Proposals against the incitement of hatred/hostility ........................................................... 4 Improving th

8. Proposals against incitement of hatred and discrimination - discussion document - large print [pdf, 458 KB]

   18pt Proposals against Incitement of Hatred and Discrimination Ministry of Justice Tāhū o te Ture Ministry of Justice | Tāhū o te Ture New Zealand Government This large format text is produced under Section 69 of the NZ Copyright (Marrakesh Treaty Implementation) Amendment Act 2019. It is for your own personal use and cannot be shared with anyone else. The author and publisher reserve the right to take legal action if the Act

9. Findlay v Auckland City Council [pdf, 108 KB]

   ...organised the building of the home by directly contracting with the architect and each of the trades involved in its construction. The Auckland City Council and Mr Slater submit, amongst their defences to the claim, that he failed to take reasonable care in looking after the owners’ interests by not properly instructing and managing the contractors and ensuring an oversight of the quality of their construction work and thereby contributed to his and the claimant trust’s own...

10. JD v RU LCRO 55 / 2011 (22 March 2012) [pdf, 130 KB]

    ...took place at the [Auckland] District Court when the accused appeared to answer the charges laid against him. [3] Mr JD complains that Mr RU’s conduct on the day breached a number of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008. He lists these in his complaint to the Complaints Service of the New Zealand Law Society as follows: Chapter 10, s 10 (obligation to promote and maintain proper standards of professionalism in all dealings) Chapter...