Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 7 November 2023.
You can search by selecting a jurisdiction, a keyword (for example a name) or browse by year.
Helpful search tips:
524 items matching your search terms
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 7 November 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 31 October 2023.
Decision on liability and penalty. Date of decision: 31 October 2023.
Decision rescinded 1 August 2024. See decision [2024] NZLCDT 22.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 13 October 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 10 October 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 10 October 2023.
Decision on costs. Date of decision: 21 September 2023.
Decision on costs. Date of decision: 1 September 2023.
Decision on manner of compliance with witness summonses. Date of decision: 23 August 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 18 August 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 17 August 2023.
Decision on application to practice on own account. Date of decision: 16 August 2023.
Decision on application to strike out proceeding. Date of decision: 4 August 2023.
Decision on penalty. Date of decision: 27 July 2023.
Name suppression / Tribunal initially declined name suppression as practitioner’s interests did not tip balance from starting point of open justice / practitioner sought judicial review / High Court required Tribunal to reconsider name suppression having regard to interests of complainants, an unrelated practitioner that shares practitioner’s uncommon name and other similarities, and practitioner’s family members / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 240 / HELD / real likelihood that unrelated practitioner will be unfairly associated with practitioner’s misconduct / one of two complainants supports name suppression / effect of publication on practitioner’s family members considered / unusual combination of factors tipped balance in favour of suppression / name suppression proper to avoid confusion with unrelated practitioner and damage to his reputation and legal practice, having regard to serious misconduct of practitioner / permanent name suppression granted
Decision on application for restoration to the roll. Date of decision: 18 July 2023.
Penalty / negligence for issuing seven inaccurate invoices / HELD / offending at moderate level of seriousness / conduct took place over long period of time and involved multiple errors / inaccuracies were not trivial / practitioner showed lack of responsibility or lack of insight, but did self-report to Law Society / one prior adverse finding of unsatisfactory conduct a weak aggravating factor / mitigating factors / references / community work / conduct not undertaken for personal gain / cooperated with disciplinary process / references given considerable weight as they provide insight into practitioner’s altruism, which endorses public confidence in profession / public protection not a factor as practitioner is retired and his conduct caused no harm / Tribunal ordered censure and $8,000 fine / practitioner to pay contribution towards Standards Committee’s costs ($12,500) and full Tribunal’s costs / permanent name suppression granted
Penalty / misconduct for using client’s money as own despite client not receiving independent advice / negligence for failing to structure professional relationship and embarking on risky litigation strategy / HELD / conduct occurred 18 months after practitioner persuaded Law Society he had reformed / misconduct comprising 17 failures and finding of negligence which had potentially serious consequences for client takes conduct to most serious end of misconduct / aggravating features / prior convictions involving dishonesty and breach of trust / failure to disclose bankruptcies when applying for certificate of character / lying to Tribunal / lack of insight or accountability / disciplinary history / length of time of conduct / mitigating feature of pro bono and community work / not capable of rehabilitation / Tribunal ordered practitioner be struck off and pay compensation ($25,000) to client / practitioner to pay Standards Committee’s and Tribunal’s costs
Liability and penalty / failed to ensure client gave accurate information about business ownership despite circumstances which should have alerted him to further enquiry / client’s business sold without authority of other owner of business / Conduct and Client Care Rules 2008, rule 11.4 / HELD / failure had serious consequences but was an honest mistake / not disgraceful or dishonourable or reckless breach of rules / not negligent / culpability reduced by the fact that the business’ land was in client’s sole name / practitioner was away when financing statement naming other business owner was revealed immediately before settlement / deprived him of opportunity of reinvestigation / unsatisfactory conduct proved (section 12(a)) / mitigating feature of clean record / Tribunal ordered practitioner to pay $5,000 fine and compensation ($3,000) to other business owner / practitioner to pay contribution to Standards Committee’s costs ($15,000) and full Tribunal’s costs
Penalty / practitioner admitted two charges of misconduct / failed to comply with Standards Committee order / failed to respond to enquiries or requests from Standards Committee in timely manner / HELD / failing to engage with professional body and comply with orders always treated seriously / practitioner promptly engaged another practitioner to supervise his practice / previous finding of unsatisfactory conduct shows troubling pattern of behaviour / mitigating factors / long career without disciplinary action / poor physical health / commitment to care for wife during illness which moved practitioner’s focus away from practice / willingness to be supervised by another practitioner ensuring no repetition of procrastination / Tribunal ordered censure, two months’ suspension and supervision / practitioner to pay Standards Committee’s and Tribunal’s costs
Liability / practitioner admitted disgraceful and dishonourable misconduct charge but disputed facts & denied misconduct in professional capacity charge under Law Practitioners Act 1982, section 112(a) / long-term intimate relationship between lawyers / conduct during periods of breaks in relationship and at end / proper purpose of professional discipline / effect on evidence of delay / HELD / most serious incident involved practitioner breaking into Ms X’s home during relationship break, by forcing her apartment door until it gave way, taking her phone, following her into her bedroom, and pulling her down on the bed / police removed practitioner / factual findings made regarding other incidents and harassment, bullying allegations / delay in complaint limited available evidence / misconduct in professional capacity charge dismissed as drunken boorish behaviour did not meet standard / disgraceful and dishonourable misconduct admitted / parties to file penalty submissions
Revoke interim suspension / misconduct for using client’s money as own despite client not receiving independent advice / negligence for failing to structure professional relationship and embarking on risky litigation strategy / Hart v Auckland Standards Committee 1 [2012] NZAR 1085 / HELD / difficulty in changing lawyers for practitioner’s clients outweighed by risk to public / use of client funds comprised serious failures / lacks candour / past convictions for dishonesty offending / negligent conduct towards client / tardy, dishonest and evasive manner of conduct at and before hearing / clients will inevitably face difficulty as practitioner will at least face suspension / relying on Hart, Tribunal to grant relief from interim suspension sparingly and only in circumstances not placing public at risk / evidence does not change conclusion that practitioner not fit and proper / application dismissed
Penalty / two charges of misconduct / falsely stated cost of client’s drug assessment report / deleted electronic copy of report and failed to inform client or client’s new lawyer of report / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 3 / HELD / admitted lie about drug report bill only at the hearing / lie was deliberate / combination of behaviours which fundamentally breached fiduciary relationship and trust brings strike-off into play / Tribunal noted practitioner’s years of service as lawyer and to community, and numerous references which had considerable impact on penalty orders / aggravating features include vulnerability of client and resultant imbalance of power / mitigating features include client not having paid the bill yet, years of good service and generally good reputation / Tribunal ordered censure, 12 months’ suspension, supervision upon return to practice, and therapy / practitioner to pay Standards Committee’s and Tribunal’s costs
Liability / two charges / took control of first client’s bank accounts and used money as own despite client not receiving independent advice / failed to structure professional relationship and embarked on risky litigation strategy for second client / Conduct and Client Care Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 3.4 / rule 3.4A / rule 3.5 / rule 3.5A / rule 3.6 / rule 4.2 / rule 4.2.4 / rule 4.4.1 / rule 5.4 / rule 5.4.4 / rule 7.1 / rule 7.6 / rule 9.6 / rule 10 / rule 10.14 / HELD / misled and manipulated first client / mishandled his money / placed client at financial risk / has not accounted properly for transactions / did not seek supervision / did not cooperate with Committee / lied to Tribunal about a material matter / careless as to second client’s needs / gravity of conduct elevated by regarding relationships with clients as friendship / misconduct proved in relation to first client (s 7(1)(a)(i)) / negligence proved in relation to second client (s 241(c)) / parties to file penalty submiss…