Ministry of Justice

Liability and penalty / sexual harassment / two indecent assaults / one assault in sexualized context / HELD / assaults occurred during taxi rides home from firm functions, is within ambit of providing legal services / assaults were a breach of trust, opportunistic and made when victims were alone and in an enclosed space / conduct suggests pattern of disrespect for sexual boundaries of employees / all assaults found to be misconduct / not less serious than Gardner-Hopkins and Palmer as it was more invasive and victims were isolated and trapped / conduct repeated on Victim A despite objections / Victim B suffered profound impact / mitigating factors include accepting victims’ evidence, clean record and reputation / Tribunal ordered 20 months’ suspension, censure and compensation ($10,000) to Victim B / practitioner to pay Standards Committee’s and Tribunal’s costs / interim name suppression granted

Penalty / practitioner admitted two charges of misconduct / recklessly acted for both parties in a transaction / failed to ensure clients knew meaning of documents to sign / admitted two charges of unsatisfactory conduct / failed to act on client’s request to uplift file / failed to comply with penalty order / HELD / conduct not dishonest or prompted by self-interest / acting within a conflict of duties to clients is serious, but not at highest end of culpability / breach of disciplinary order is serious, but practitioner was confused about whether he filed a review / disciplinary history an aggravating factor / mitigating factors include admitting charges, pro bono and community work and delay in proceedings outside practitioner’s control / censure inappropriate for elderly retired practitioner in poor health / Tribunal ordered 15 months’ suspension / practitioner to pay 60 per cent of Standards Committee’s costs ($16,886.33) and full Tribunal’s costs

Penalty / misconduct for blackmail / unsatisfactory conduct for bringing prohibited materials to exam / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 3 / section 240 / section 242(1)(g) / HELD / no dishonesty or cheating / no additional penalty for breach of exam rules / practitioner inexperienced and unsupported by former employer / blackmail was ignorant mistake / no damage done / now supervised by current employer and mentored by prominent lawyer / blackmail in these circumstances not a major breach / not ready to practise on own account / publishing practitioner’s name would be grossly unfair considering former employer’s name was suppressed / practitioner is in safe circumstances to develop professionally / Tribunal ordered practitioner to undergo training / imposed conditions on current mentoring arrangements / prohibited from practising on own account / granted permanent name suppression

Restoration of name to roll of barristers and solicitors / practitioner struck off eight years ago for a criminal conviction involving delivering unlawful items to a prisoner in prison / falsely accused two corrections officers of planting the items / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 3 / section 55 / section 246 / HELD / conduct was a gross breach of trust and abuse of position as a lawyer / aggravating features of engaging in conduct when acting as a lawyer and accusing corrections officers that she knew were innocent / lacks insight, compassion for those she has harmed &  genuine remorse for wrongdoing / instead demonstrates self-interest and regret for damage caused to herself and those near her / further failure in 2017 to alert employer of her convictions casts doubt on her probity and candour / relevant character defects still profound and cannot be managed by supervision / application dismissed

Liability and penalty / misconduct for failing to follow up on immigration work for three clients / misleading employer and client about progress of work / providing regulated services without supervision / unsatisfactory conduct for failing to secure client documents / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 9 / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rule 3 / rule 4.2 / rule 11.1 / HELD / misconduct was serious having regard to length of time over which conduct endured, serious consequences for clients and element of deception / strike-off not appropriate due to practitioner’s young age, inexperience and lack of supervision / rehabilitative pathways could not be explored as practitioner did not attend hearing / Committee’s costs too high for a formal proof claim with a less-than-half-day hearing / Tribunal ordered two years’ suspension / practitioner to pay reduced Standards Committee’s costs ($35,000) and full Tribunal’s costs

Penalty / practitioner admitted three charges of misconduct / altered emails to appear they were sent on earlier date / second charge redacted / misled the Committee / HELD / seriousness of misconduct warrants suspension / conduct strikes at heart of professional obligations due to dishonesty, allowing personal life to impinge on performance and providing misleading information to professional body / emails were altered on six occasions, showing repeated and premeditated deception / mitigating factors include early guilty plea, apology, remorse, regular attendance before psychologist, and voluntary cancellation of practising certificate / principle of deterrence to be at forefront in deciding penalty for charges of this kind / medical evidence shows personal interests outweighs public interest in knowing practitioner’s identity / Tribunal ordered six months’ suspension / practitioner to pay Standards Committee’s and Tribunal’s costs / permanent name suppression granted

Penalty / misconduct for abusing position as lawyer to visit a defendant of criminal proceedings in court custody without consent from his lawyer / conduct fell within personal and not professional category / HELD / conduct was transitory and out of character / deliberate abuse of privilege as lawyer a serious departure from standards expected of lawyers / clear misuse of privilege and power / mitigating features / cooperation / accepted wrongdoing / regret, remorse and apology / reflecting on conduct with peers / clean record / contribution to profession / character references / deterrence in this case required no more than formal censure and contribution to costs / is proportionate to level of misconduct / costs principles discussed / Tribunal ordered censure / practitioner to pay reduced Standards Committee’s costs ($14,500) and 70 per cent Tribunal’s costs

Liability / three charges / practitioner brought prohibited materials to Trust Account Supervisor’s exam / used blackmail to gain advantage in negotiations / threatened to use complaints process to discourage law firm from complaining about her conduct / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 3 / Conduct and Client Care Rules 2008, rule 2.3 / rule 2.4 / rule 2.7 / HELD / practitioner knew or ought to have known not to bring prohibited materials to exam, but did not use materials / did not cheat / admitted unsatisfactory conduct (section 12(c)) / blackmail not wilful as practitioner was following client’s instruction and was unaware of rule 2.7, but ignorance or inexperience not an excuse / using improper lever to gain advantage in negotiation is unethical and a crime / misconduct found (section 7(1)(a)(i)) / threat to use complaints process was an emotive misfire / threat to involve news media not real / third charge dismissed / parties to file penalty submissions

Interim suspension / urgent application by Standards Committee / affidavit evidence shows practitioner deceived bank or misappropriated funds advanced for a purported settlement by diverting funds for personal use / bank closed practitioner’s trust account, but he could open another account unless suspended / evidence indicates practitioner’s trust account dealings may have been irregular for some time / HELD / practitioner does not appreciate that using the funds for personal reasons is wrongful / indicates he has lost his moral compass in relation to trust monies / the public and bankers that may be engaged by the practitioner are at risk / necessary or desirable to make suspension order having regard to the interests of the public and banks / practitioner consents to making of suspension order on without prejudice basis / Tribunal ordered interim suspension without prejudice until charge is disposed of / application successful

Penalty / misconduct for tardy estate distribution / mocked LCRO’s apology order / HELD / fourth appearance before Tribunal in five years / practitioner wrote offending apology letter before last Tribunal matter / was warned about suspension / if he had reflected on his then recent behaviour, he could have written a fresh, proper apology / demonstrates a truculent characteristic / suspension is least restrictive option / successive warnings provide relevant context / mitigating factors include attendance of counselling and legal aid work / additional fine would be an ineffective deterrent as shown by accrued fines from previous penalties / apology not ordered as it would be better for practitioner’s and complainant’s interests to let the matter go / Tribunal ordered two months’ suspension / practitioner to pay Standards Committee’s and Tribunal’s costs

Liability / two charges of misconduct / practitioner convicted of offence which reflects on fitness to practise or tends to bring profession into disrepute / made thirteen irregular transfers of money from trust account to practice account / allowed trust account balance to drop below sum he was obligated to retain pending completion of work / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 110 / section 112 / Trust Account Regulations 2008, reg 6 / reg 9 / reg 11 / reg 12 / HELD / practitioner admitted first charge / convicted for evading income tax for ten years / transferring trust monies while confused about what sums he was entitled to was not proper practice / retention funds remained client’s property pending settlement and must be retained wholly in trust account / practitioner’s actions were wilful as he knew trust monies must be held for client but intentionally transferred them to practice account for personal use / charges proven / parties to file penalty submissions

Liability / criminal sentencing proceedings / practitioner falsely stated on invoice the cost of a drug assessment report / when client was assigned a new lawyer, destroyed the report and failed to inform new lawyer or court that report was completed / filed misleading memorandum stating report not complete / Conduct and Client Care Rules 2008, rule 3.1 / rule 5.1 / HELD / practitioner deliberately lied to client / used misleading communication about cost of report for own pecuniary interests when client was vulnerable / deleting report not a proper way to deal with client’s information / could have alerted new lawyer about report / continued to owe legal and fiduciary duties to client until relieved of role by new lawyer / client denied litigation advantage of the report at critical point / filing of memorandum not misleading as it was correct at time of filing / first two charges proven at level of misconduct / third charge dismissed / parties to file penalty submissions

Liability / three charges of misconduct for failure to comply with section 147 notice in relation to four clients / practitioner failed to inform clients or give effect to instructions in a timely manner / clients instructed new lawyers and lodged complaints / Standards Committee required practitioner to provide documents in relation to clients’ files and gave multiple extensions and reminders / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 147 / HELD / common theme between charges is practitioner’s lack of engagement with her governing body / Committee’s requests for practitioner to provide information were reasonable / practitioners have basic professional obligation to co-operate with Law Society and provide accurate information / practitioner’s failures to respond to Committee were inexcusably tardy / practitioner’s responses were only partial / despite COVID-19 restrictions, ample time was given to comply with requests / misconduct found / parties to file penalty submissions