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:
1384 items matching your search terms
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / applicant changed lawyers / applicant did not send files to new lawyers / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 4.4.1 / whether authority to uplift documents included files / HELD / applicant acted on request to uplift documents without delay / request did not include files / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / leaky building litigation / dispute about appropriate forum for litigation / dispute about clause in litigation agreement / complaint lawyer did not act in a timely manner / did not give clear advice / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 9 / whether lawyer should have salvaged litigation agreement / HELD / lawyer acted competently / litigation strategy was appropriate considering the law at the time / fees fair and reasonable / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / lawyer acted for client under grant of legal aid / complaint lawyer did not spend enough time on case / failed to follow instructions / HELD / no evidence to support complaints / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / property purchase / vendor’s lawyer attempted to cancel sale / complaint respondent failed to advise vendor’s lawyer that conditions had been satisfied / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / Wilson v Legal Complaints Review Officer [2016] NZHC 2288 / HELD / lawyer acted in a timely manner and in accordance with instructions / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / administration of will / complaint applicant failed to uplift documents when requested by respondent’s lawyer / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Complaints Service and Standards Committees) Regulations 2008, regulation 29 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 4 / rule 4.1 / 4.4 / rule 4.4.1 / whether applicant instructed to act / whether there are special circumstances to consider fees less than $2,000 / HELD / assertion of lien over will unsatisfactory conduct / applicant had been instructed to act / fees fair and reasonable / Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)
Date of decision: 24 December 2018.
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / preparation of will / applicant not client of lawyer / complaint that lawyer prepared will without instructions / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 8 / rule 8.4 / whether lawyer breached duty of confidence / HELD / no evidence that lawyer acted without seeking instructions / breach of confidence does not warrant a disciplinary response in the circumstances / no conduct issues arise / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / agreement to sell property / refund of deposit / complaint lawyer refunded deposit without instructions / duties of stakeholders holding deposits / HELD / lawyer obliged to refund deposit / no conduct issues arise / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / child support proceedings / complaint lawyer failed to follow instructions / failed to give competent advice / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 161 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 9 / rule 9.1 / rule 13.3 / Henderson Reeves Connell Rishworth Lawyers Ltd v Busch [2013] NZHC 3089 / Norris Ward McKinnon v Kaye [2016] NZHC 3089 / Simpson Grierson v Gilmour (2009) 16 PRNZ 865 (HC) / whether Disputes Tribunal claim to recover fees prevents Office considering a fee complaint / duties in litigation / HELD / Committee should have process for dealing with fee complaints lodged in other jurisdictions / lawyer acted reasonably and protected client’s interests / fees fair and reasonable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / leaky building litigation / failure to discontinue District Court proceedings / failed to competently supervise and manage junior lawyers / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 11.3 / Watson v Watson (1990) 4 PRNZ 397 (HC) / SK and RM v GJ LCRO 36/2015 (14 December 2016) / HELD / lawyer was partner responsible for proceedings / duty to supervise and manage junior employees / failed to serve proceedings promptly / breach of rule 13.3 / unsatisfactory conduct / Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / settlement negotiation / complaint lawyer threatened media exposure of applicant / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.7 / rule 2.10 / whether threat made for an improper purpose / whether respondent threatened to use complaints process for improper purpose / SC v JT LCRO 382/2013 (30 June 2017) / HELD / threats made for an improper purpose / breach of rules 2.7 and 2.10 / Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / estate dispute / complaint lawyer had not drafted the will properly / conflict of interest / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 5 / rule 6 / rule 7.1 / rule 11.3 / Gilbert v Shanahan [1998] 3 NZLR 528 (CA) / Woods v Legal Complaints Review Officer [2013] NZHC 674, [2013] NZAR 577 / Carr-Glynn v Frearsons [1999] Ch 326 (CA) / AG v ZT LCRO 159/2010 (18 February 2011) / ZK v XM LCRO 201/2017 (29 June 0218) / whether lawyer had explained effect of joint tenancy to client / whether lawyer acted for estate and beneficiary / HELD / lawyer had a duty to check the property’s title / unsatisfactory conduct / conflict of interest / Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / formation of trust / failed to supervise legal executive / legal executive witnessed signatures on unprepared forms / complaint lawyer’s advice incompetent / Property (Relationships) Act 1976, section 18/ Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 3.4 / rule 3.5 / rule 6 / rule 7.1 / McGuire v Manawatu Standards Committee [2016] NZHC 1052 / provision of client care information / scope of retainer / HELD / lawyer failed to properly advise client / failed to provide client information / did ensure client understood retainer / Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / applicant facing IRD charges / lawyers with necessary experience left the firm / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9 / rule 9.1 / Chean v Kensington Swan HC Auckland CIV-2006-404-1047, 7 June 2006 / whether respondents were responsible for setting fee / whether Committee identified the correct parties for the complaint / HELD / respondents not responsible for setting fees / Committee failed to identify correct parties / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / sale of relationship property dispute / lawyer had previously acted for applicant and applicant’s partner / complaint lawyer had a conflict of interest / allegation lawyer had colluded to obtain a lower price for relationship property / P v H LCRO 2/2009 (20 March 2009) / lawyer acting against former clients / HELD / lawyer had applicant’s consent to act / no evidence to support allegations / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee passed resolution to inquire into complaints / resolution to appoint investigator / jurisdiction of office / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 section 142(1) / Orlov v NZLS [2013] NZSC 94 / HELD / Office should not interfere with Committee’s resolutions / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / dispute over estate / respondent acted for executor / applicant estate beneficiary / complaint respondent misled applicant / complaint respondent gained commission on estate sale / Re: Stewart [2003] 1 NZLR 809 (HC) / Irvine v Public Trustee [1989] 1 NZLR 67 (CA) / obligations of respondent to applicant / HELD / duties owed to executor / no evidence before committee about commission / Committee directed to reconsider commission complaint / section 209(1)(a) / Committee’s decision otherwise confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Review / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / relationship property dispute / interim injunction to freeze property / memorandum filed by applicant contained errors / complaint applicant misled court / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 13 / rule 13.1 / HELD / no evidence that court was misled / errors were minor / conduct does not warrant further action / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / property purchase / transfer needed consent from Maori Land Court / complaint lawyer had not mentioned that consent was required / failed to respond to enquiries / conduct prior to 1 August 2008 / HELD / conduct occurred prior to 1 August 2008 / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / property purchase / complaint lawyer failed to advise about electricity easements / did not supply terms of engagement / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Complaints Service and Standards Committee) Regulations 2008, regulation 29 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 1.2 / rule 3 / rule 7 / rule 7.1 / rule 9 / rule 9.1 / whether lawyer billed applicant twice for same work / whether invoices should be treated separately / HELD / lawyer failed to advise clients about easements / invoices should be considered together / fees not fair and reasonable / breach of rule 3 / breach of rule 7.1 / unsatisfactory conduct / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / property purchase / due diligence / complaint lawyer did not complete GST section of agreement for sale and purchase / HELD / lawyer not acting for applicant / no duties owed to applicant / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / property purchase / property sharing agreement / complaint lawyer was acting for both parties to agreement / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.4 / rule 6 / rule 6.1 / Pegrum v Fatharly (1996) 14 WAR 92 (SC) / conflict of interest / whether lawyer acting for both parties / HELD / lawyer acted for both parties / conflict of interest / lawyer did not provide applicant terms of engagement / breach of rule 3.4 / breach of rule 6.1 / unsatisfactory conduct / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / estate dispute / both applicant and respondent lawyers / complaint respondent did not act competently / did not inform client of legal aid availability / did not obtain client’s instructions / attacked reputation / lacked respect and courtesy / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 2.3 / rule 2.7 / rule 9.2 / rule 10 / HELD / client has not complained about lawyer’s conduct / lawyer was acting on client’s instructions / no evidence to support complaints / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / separation agreement / applicant became liable for a tax bill / complaint lawyer provided incorrect advice / Limitation Act 1950 / HELD / lawyer raised Limitation Act issues with the client / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / separation agreement / applicant became liable for a tax bill / complaint lawyer provided incorrect advice / Limitation Act 1950 / HELD / lawyer raised Limitation Act issues with the client / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)