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:
1326 items matching your search terms
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / fee complaint / acting without instruction / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Complaints Service and Standards Committees) Regulations 2008 reg 29 / HELD / fees reasonable / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / purchase of business / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care Rules) 2008 rule 3 / competence of respondent / supervision of legal executive / HELD / applicant attended to matters without advice / respondents involvement minimal / supervision appropriate / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint arose from leaky building litigation / whether applicants’ client consented to join litigation / whether solicitor-client relationship existed / HELD / reasonable for respondent to proceed on basis of authority / no separate duty or conflict of interest / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / respondent’s client lawyer / respondent’s client had name suppression / applicant made a complaint about respondent’s client / respondent claims applicant breach suppression and was in contempt / applicant complains about respondent’s actions / HELD / respondent’s claim was arguable / complaint lacked merit / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Date of Decision: 28 September 2017
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care Rules) 2008 rule 13.8 / rule 13.8.1 / respondent made critical comments made during trial about applicant / no evidence to support comments / HELD / context of closing submissions / comments not attack / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / NZ Society of Conveyancers Committee declined to take further action on complaint / complaint over comments made by respondent / comments were serious allegations / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Conveyancing Practitioners: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 6 / rule 29 / Evidence Act 2006 section 54(1) / third party respect / privileged communication / HELD / comments not unsatisfactory conduct / conveyancer/client communications not privileged / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / NZ Society of Conveyancers Committee declined to take further action on complaint / complaint over comments made by respondent / comments were serious allegations / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Conveyancing Practitioners: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 6 / rule 29 / Evidence Act 2006 section 54(1) / third party respect / privileged communication / HELD / comments not unsatisfactory conduct / Conveyancer/client communications not privileged / section 211(1)(a
Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / applicant had previously acted for respondent / applicant had not checked for conflict of interest / Morpeth v Ramsey LCRO 110/2009 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 6.1 / conflict of interest / ongoing duty of loyalty / HELD / unsatisfactory conduct not supported / no basis to make orders sought / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / applicant wants respondent to carry out instructions / respondent requires security for fees / HELD / respondent not instructed / applicant able to seek another lawyer / no power to force respondent to act / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / respondent acted in family court proceedings / complaint that matter not straightforward / failure to advise / HELD / complaints unsupported by evidence / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / JN’s lawyer / J charged weekly rate / Jensen v Calver LCRO 55/2015 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 13.3 / failure to appear / failure to place funds in trust account / failure to render final account / acting without instructions / HELD / J had arranged for agent to appear / conduct otherwise unsatisfactory / fine reduced / Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care Rules) 2008 rule 2.3 / rule 2.7 / rule 12 / respondent sent letter to applicant’s father / letter threatened legal action / letter included correspondence from the applicant / applicant’s privacy / letter improper use of legal threat / HELD / no duty of confidentiality to applicant’s / duty to carry out instructions / letter not improper threat / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care Rules) 2008 rule 1.2 / rule 7 / rule 8 / rule 8.1 / rule 8.4 / applicant contacted respondent’s office for advice / check revealed former partner of applicant previous client of respondent / respondent disclosed call to former client / duty to disclose / whether retainer existed / HELD / no disclosure required to former client / breach of rule 8.1 / unsatisfactory conduct / Committee’s decision reversed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / purchase of a property / complaint lawyer failed to act competently / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3.10 / rule 9 / rule 9.6 / whether there was an estimate of fees / retainer prior to 1 August 2008 / HELD / lawyer encouraged to use interim accounts in the future / fees fair and reasonable / estimate was not a quote / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / employment dispute / complaint lawyer failed to treat applicant with respect and courtesy / lawyer had failed to give applicant money / HELD / lawyer apologised for PA’s email / applicant not entitled to money / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / debt recovery / applicant engaged Baycorp / lawyer acted for Baycorp / complaint lawyer did not act in a timely manner / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 12 / third party duties / HELD / limited duties owed to third parties / no conduct issues arise / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / construction dispute / matter went to arbitration / complaint lawyer failed to treat applicant with respect and courtesy / lawyer had disclosed confidential information / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10.1 / HELD / lawyer acting on instructions from client / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / complaint lawyer failed to pay child support / HELD / conduct unconnected with provision of regulated services / Office not correct forum for complaint / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / company placed into receivership / lawyer acted for bank / complaint lawyer did not look at documentation when ordering liquidation / HELD / lawyer owes not duties to applicant / Office has no jurisdiction to consider complaints / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / complaint lawyer failed to serve notice of arbitration / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 10.2 / HELD / lawyer had a duty not to communicate directly with another lawyer’s client / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint lawyer had a conflict of interest / complaint lawyer was dishonest and misleading / some complaints assessed under the Law Practitioners Act 1982 / matter when to arbitration / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 6.1 / rule 6.1.1 / whether there was a more than negligible risk of a conflict of interests/ HELD / negligible risk of a conflict of interests / no evidence that lawyer had been dishonest or misleading / Committee’s decision confirmed / section 211(1)(a)
Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaint / dispute over trust / complaint lawyer about how the lawyer administered the trust / fee complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 9 / HELD / applicant not client of the lawyer / lawyer has different duties when acting as a trustee / 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 / 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)