Decision (30 November 2016)
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
Decision (30 November 2016)
Mr VH, a member of the Board of trustees of LD Trust ([Text removed]), has applied for a review of a decision by the [Area] Standards Committee in which the Committee decided that further action was not necessary or appropriate, having regard to all the circumstances of the complaint, which dealt with Mr CN’s conduct in relation to instructions he had received about trust governance issues.
Mr Faleauto has applied for a review of a direction to publish his name, in the context of a summary of facts, outcome, and orders following Ms GH’s complaints about his conduct and service. The direction was made by the X Standards Committee X pursuant to s 142(2) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act), with the prior approval of the Board of the New Zealand Law Society (NZLS) given on 25 February 2015, pursuant to reg 30 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Complaints Service and Standards Committees) Regulations 2008 (the Committee Regulations).
Mr Faleauto has applied for a review of a direction to publish his name, in the context of a summary of facts, outcome, and orders following Mr DE’s complaints about his conduct and service. The direction was made by the X Standards Committee X, pursuant to s 142(2) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act), with the prior approval of the Board of the New Zealand Law Society (NZLS) given on [Date] 2015, pursuant to reg 30 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Complaints Service and Standards Committee) Regulations 2008 (the Committee Regulations).
Lawyer issued proceedings personally against another lawyer and his client alleging maintenance / champerty, abuse of process, unlawful conspiracy to injure and defamation. The other lawyer had previously complained about the first lawyer, and those complaints were part of charges brought against the first lawyer before the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal. The complainant (second lawyer) alleged the first lawyer had commenced proceedings for the purpose of intimidating him and his client, and to gain discovery of his files. Standards Committee agreed, and found unsatisfactory conduct by reason of breach of r 2.3 CCCR ( legal processes to be used for proper purposes only.) Committee also found breaches of rr10 and 13.2. Applicant argued that the CCCR did not apply because he was not providing regulated services. LCRO agreed the lawyer was not providing regulated services, but CCCR apply according to their terms - EA v ABO LCRO 237/2010 applied. LCRO reversed finding of un…
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint lawyer incompetent / inadequate supervision / misleading court / conflict of interest / failure to respond to client / fees complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 5.11 / rule 13.5 / GL v UE LCRO 206/2010 (21 October 2011) / HELD / Office not correct forum for some complaints / fees fair and reasonable / breach of rule 5.11 / unsatisfactory conduct / Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)
By reason of a breach of rule 9 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 and pursuant to s 12(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, Ms CN’s conduct in respect of the matters addressed in paragraphs [58] to [122] constitutes unsatisfactory conduct.
Mrs EA has applied for a review of a decision by the [Area] Standards Committee dated 8 June 2015 in which the Committee found there had been unsatisfactory conduct on the part of Ms NR. The Committee imposed consequential orders under s 156(1) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act) ordering Ms NR to pay compensation of $5,000 and apologise to Mrs EA, pay costs of $1,000 to the New Zealand Law Society (NZLS) and reprimanding her.
Pursuant to s 211(1)(a) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 the decision of the Standards Committee is confirmed.
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / relationship property and custody dispute / complaint over serving documents at workplace / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 10.2 / rule 12 / communicating directly with another lawyers client / respect and courtesy to third parties / HELD / no direct communication / serving documents caused embarrassment / breach of rule 12 / unsatisfactory conduct / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Pursuant to s 211(1)(a) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, the decision of the Standards Committee is confirmed.
Pursuant to s 211(1)(a) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 the decision of the Standards Committee is confirmed.
Pursuant to s 211(1)(a) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 the decision of the Standards Committee is reversed. The practitioner is found to be guilty of unsatisfactory conduct pursuant to s 12(c) of the Act.
Pursuant to s 211(1)(a) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, the decision is modified to record that there has been unsatisfactory conduct on Mr OX’s part pursuant to s 12(b).
The application for review is dismissed.
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / conflict of interest / jurisdiction of LCRO / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 12 / courtesy to third party / HELD / limited duties owed to third parties / no evidence of conflict of interest / Office has no jurisdiction / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / relationship property and custody dispute / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 12 / duties to third party / HELD / limited duties owed to third parties / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / lawyer made llegations of deceit / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 13.8 / rule 13.8.1 / rule 13.8.2 / whether sufficient grounds to allege deceit / HELD / proper grounds for allegations / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Pursuant to s 211(1)(a) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 the decision of the Standards Committee is confirmed.
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint over lawyer acting in disciplinary proceedings / complaint lawyer expressed personal opinion / complaint lawyer incompetent / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 / rule 13.5 / rule 13.5.1 / rule 13.5.4 / HELD / no substance to complaints / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint about statements in article / criticism of judiciary / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 section 138(1)(c) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 2 / rule 2.8 / rule 10 / LP v CS LCRO 170/2011 obligation to report a lawyer / context of comments / vexatious complaint / HELD / comments part of public debate / no conduct issues / complaint vexatious / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint over money held in lawyer’s trust account / jurisdiction of LCRO / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 section 110 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 12 / courtesy to third party / HELD / money held requires joint instructions / Office has no jurisdiction / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint/ Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint about statements in article / criticism of judiciary / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 section 138(1)(c) / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 2 / rule 2.8 / rule 10 / LP v CS LCRO 170/2011 obligation to report a lawyer / context of comments / vexatious complaint / HELD / comments part of public debate / no conduct issues / complaint vexatious / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Request recusal of LCRO / applicant lacked sufficient personal connection / Saxmere Co Ltd v New Zealand Wool Board Disestablishment Co Ltd [2007] NZCA 334, [2010] 1 NZLR 35 / Muir v Inland Revenue Department [2009] NZSC 72, [2007] 3 NZLR 495 / bias / HELD / no basis for recusal / recusal denied
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint over delay in uplifting files / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 / rule 4.4 / rule 4.4.1 rule 10 / rule 10.3 / treating other lawyers with courtesy and respect / urgency in obtaining files / communication with former client / HELD / no undue delay in providing files / proper to communicate with former client to confirm instructions / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)