Ministry of Justice

Name suppression / Tribunal initially declined name suppression as practitioner’s interests did not tip balance from starting point of open justice / practitioner sought judicial review / High Court required Tribunal to reconsider name suppression having regard to interests of complainants, an unrelated practitioner that shares practitioner’s uncommon name and other similarities, and practitioner’s family members / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 240 / HELD / real likelihood that unrelated practitioner will be unfairly associated with practitioner’s misconduct / one of two complainants supports name suppression / effect of publication on practitioner’s family members considered / unusual combination of factors tipped balance in favour of suppression / name suppression proper to avoid confusion with unrelated practitioner and damage to his reputation and legal practice, having regard to serious misconduct of practitioner / permanent name suppression granted

Penalty / negligence for issuing seven inaccurate invoices / HELD / offending at moderate level of seriousness / conduct took place over long period of time and involved multiple errors / inaccuracies were not trivial / practitioner showed lack of responsibility or lack of insight, but did self-report to Law Society / one prior adverse finding of unsatisfactory conduct a weak aggravating factor / mitigating factors / references / community work / conduct not undertaken for personal gain / cooperated with disciplinary process / references given considerable weight as they provide insight into practitioner’s altruism, which endorses public confidence in profession / public protection not a factor as practitioner is retired and his conduct caused no harm / Tribunal ordered censure and $8,000 fine / practitioner to pay contribution towards Standards Committee’s costs ($12,500) and full Tribunal’s costs / permanent name suppression granted

Liability and penalty / failed to ensure client gave accurate information about business ownership despite circumstances which should have alerted him to further enquiry / client’s business sold without authority of other owner of business / Conduct and Client Care Rules 2008, rule 11.4 / HELD / failure had serious consequences but was an honest mistake / not disgraceful or dishonourable or reckless breach of rules / not negligent / culpability reduced by the fact that the business’ land was in client’s sole name / practitioner was away when financing statement naming other business owner was revealed immediately before settlement / deprived him of opportunity of reinvestigation / unsatisfactory conduct proved (section 12(a)) / mitigating feature of clean record / Tribunal ordered practitioner to pay $5,000 fine and compensation ($3,000) to other business owner / practitioner to pay contribution to Standards Committee’s costs ($15,000) and full Tribunal’s costs

Liability / practitioner admitted disgraceful and dishonourable misconduct charge but disputed facts & denied misconduct in professional capacity charge under Law Practitioners Act 1982, section 112(a) / long-term intimate relationship  between lawyers / conduct during periods of breaks in relationship and at end / proper purpose of professional discipline / effect on evidence of delay / HELD / most serious incident involved practitioner breaking into Ms X’s home during relationship break, by forcing her apartment door until it gave way, taking her phone, following her into her bedroom, and pulling her down on the bed / police removed practitioner / factual findings made regarding other incidents and harassment, bullying allegations / delay in complaint limited available evidence / misconduct in professional capacity charge dismissed as drunken boorish behaviour did not meet standard / disgraceful and dishonourable misconduct admitted / parties to file penalty submissions

Penalty / two charges of misconduct / falsely stated cost of client’s drug assessment report / deleted electronic copy of report and failed to inform client or client’s new lawyer of report / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 3 / HELD / admitted lie about drug report bill only at the hearing / lie was deliberate / combination of behaviours which fundamentally breached fiduciary relationship and trust brings strike-off into play / Tribunal noted practitioner’s years of service as lawyer and to community, and numerous references which had considerable impact on penalty orders / aggravating features include vulnerability of client and resultant imbalance of power / mitigating features include client not having paid the bill yet, years of good service and generally good reputation / Tribunal ordered censure, 12 months’ suspension, supervision upon return to practice, and therapy / practitioner to pay Standards Committee’s and Tribunal’s costs

Liability / two charges for failing to pay compensation to two clients per Standards Committee orders / dollar amounts involved were minimal / practitioner admitted breaches but disagreed with merit of orders / did not acknowledge wrongdoing / unsuccessful in appeals and judicial reviews relating to orders / whether conduct misconduct or unsatisfactory conduct / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, section 7(1)(a) / HELD / refusal to comply with orders comprises contravention of fundamental obligation to uphold rule of law and facilitate the administration of justice / practitioner’s wilful actions in mistreating complainants of first compensation order put them to extraordinary trouble and expense / attacked their integrity and credibility / practitioner was rude and condescending to second complainant / continued refusal and improper challenges to compensation orders characterise his wilful disobedience / misconduct proved / parties to file penalty submissions

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