Evesham v Auckland Standards Committee LCRO 136 / 2009 (5 November 2009) [pdf, 190 KB]
...unbecoming. Misconduct was generally considered to be conduct: of sufficient gravity to be termed „reprehensible‟ (or „inexcusable‟, „disgraceful‟ or „deplorable‟ or „dishonourable‟) or if the default can be said to arise from negligence such negligence must be either reprehensible or be of such a degree or so frequent as to reflect on his fitness to practise. (Atkinson v Auckland District Law Society NZLPDT, 15 August 1990; Complaints Committee No 1 of the Au...