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:
1328 items matching your search terms
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / will dispute / complaint lawyer intituled documents incorrectly / conflict of interests / intituling complaint subject of an earlier complaint / HELD / no jurisdiction to consider intituling complaint / conflict of interests / complaint without merit / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / property purchase / another lawyer from the same firm acted for the vendor / complaint lawyer did not explain the agreement to the applicant / conflict of interest / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 361(1) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.4 / rule 3.5 / rule 3.10 / rule 7 / rule 7.1 / rule 8 / rule 8.1 / Campbeltown v Dunoon LCRO 129/2009 (11 November 2009) / conduct prior to 1 August 2008 / informed consent / duty to obtain client’s instructions / HELD / conflict of interest does not breach previous standards / failure to obtain instructions and consult with clients a breach of previous and current rules / unsatisfactory conduct / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / relationship property dispute / complaint lawyer failed to advise applicant properly / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9 / HELD / no professional standards issues arise / fees fair and reasonable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / relationship property dispute / complaint lawyer failed to advise applicant properly / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9 / HELD / no professional standards issues arise / fees fair and reasonable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / breach of undertaking / lawyer mislaid an item that they had undertaken to return promptly / Evidence Regulations 2007, regulation 26 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10.3 / HELD / lawyer accepts that the undertaking had been breached / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / dispute over termination of lease / complaint lawyer failed to act competently / refused to follow instructions that were outside his field of expertise / failed to promote the client’s interests / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 4 / rule 6 / HELD / no evidence for complaints / no professional standards issues arise / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / lawyer breached security at the District Court cells / lawyer misrepresented that another person was a probation officer / knowingly facilitated a prohibited meeting / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 12 / duty for a lawyer to conduct dealings with others with integrity, respect and courtesy / HELD / serious allegation / evidence does not meet high standard of proof / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Decision dated 02/08/17
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / relationship property dispute / client complained about fees / fees held to be fair and reasonable / lawyer commenced proceedings to recover fees / complaint that lawyer breached agreement not to commence proceedings / Auckland Standards Committee 3 of the New Zealand Law Society v W [2011] 3 NZLR 117 (HC) / whether lawyer breached undertaking not to commence proceedings / HELD / Committee and LCRO do not have the power to order a lawyer to withdraw proceedings / undertaking not provided / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / own motion investigation / liquidation of companies / lawyer acting for client and clients parents / conflict of interests / failure to ensure parties had independent legal advice / inadequate terms of engagement / poor communication / failure to confirm instructions / fees not fair and reasonable / breach of Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6 / rule 6.1 / rule 7 / rule 7.1 / rule 11.3 / whether client was agent of parents / HELD / act has focus on consumer protection / lawyer should have communicated directly with parents / fees not fair and reasonable / publication ordered / Committee’s decision otherwise modified / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / relationship property dispute / mediated settlement / lawyer had not initially acted for client / complaint lawyer had not acted in clients best interests / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.4 / rule 9 / rule 9.4 / whether fee estimate had been provided / HELD / lawyer acted according to instructions / estimate not provided / fees fair and reasonable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / relationship property agreement / complaint lawyer failed to follow instructions / failed to keep client informed / withheld correspondence / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 110(1)(b) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.4 / rule 3.5 / rule 7 / rule 7.1 / rule 7.2 / rule 9 / rule 9.1 / HELD / fees fair and reasonable / lawyers acting on clients instructions / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Date of Decision 28 July 2017 | LCRO
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / dispute over trust and estate / lawyer sibling of complainant / complaint lawyer had a conflict of interest / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 5.4 / HELD / lawyer only acted on non-contentious matters / no evidence to support complaints / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / employment dispute / employment dispute / Committee found lawyer had potentially mislead complainants lawyer / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 12 / whether lawyer was misleading / HELD / no evidence to support claims lawyer was misleading / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / debt recovery proceedings / disclosure of confidential information / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 8.7.1 / whether personal characteristics is confidential information / duties to former clients / HELD / lawyer had not acted for former client for many years / any insights would no longer be accurate / no confidential information / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / dispute over estate / client legally aided / lawyer had not managed employee’s conduct / failed to manage practice / lack of timeliness in providing services / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 11 / rule 11.3 / HELD / insufficient evidence on issue of timeliness and supervision / breach of rules 3 and 11.3 reversed / fine reduced / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / review of orders made by Committee / lawyer prepared a will / will maker lacked capacity / Committee ordered publication and compensation / whether client lacked capacity / HELD / questions of capacity for the courts / arguments for compensation should be tested by the courts / publication not in the public interest / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / unsuccessful criminal appeal / complaint lawyer retained a vehicle / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9.6 / final accounts / whether fees were to be paid by legal aid / HELD / not enough evidence to support fee complaint / complaints about vehicle not suitable for the Office to determine / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / administration of estate / applicant not client of lawyer / Committee found lawyer was slow to render final invoice / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9.6 / HELD / no duties owed to applicant / no evidence lawyer failed in their duties to the client / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Date of decision: 6 July 2017
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / dispute with commercial landlord / complaint lawyer terminated retainer / fee complaint / failure to send file to client / HELD / no evidence to support allegations / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / purchase of a business / lawyers acted for the vendor / refusal to return deposit / complaint lawyer breached undertaking / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10.3.2 / lawyer holding funds as stakeholder / whether agreement cancelled / HELD / complaints process not an alternative to court proceedings / the Office is not the correct forum for the dispute / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Decision (6 July 2017)
Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / email contained threat to lay complaint against another lawyer / improper use of complaints process / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.7 / rule 2.10 / UF v OU LCRO 90/2011 (20 March 2013) / improper purpose / HELD / complaints process not to be used to enforce a legal right / email not sent for improper purpose / lawyer had sought advice from senior practitioner / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)