Case commentary: a 'merciful approach' to discipline for a New Zealand lawyer's misconduct

A recent decision reveals how a New Zealand's disciplinary tribunal promoted justice for an unwell lawyer in a case of professional misconduct. In 2023, the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal (LCDT) applied a 'merciful approach' when assessing the lawyer's misconduct...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Psychiatry, psychology, and law psychology, and law, 2024-06, Vol.31 (3), p.574-586
Main Authors: Diesfeld, Kate, Rychert, Marta, Surgenor, Lois J., Kelly, Olivia, Kersey, Kate
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attorneys
disciplinary proceedings
Discipline
Employee health promotion
health pathway
Health promotion
impairment
Jurisprudence
Lawyers
Lawyers with disabilities
lawyers' discipline
Legal Case
Legal professions
Mandatory reporting
Mental health
Misconduct
Misconduct in office
name suppression
professional discipline
Professional misconduct
rehabilitation
Tribunals & commissions
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:A recent decision reveals how a New Zealand's disciplinary tribunal promoted justice for an unwell lawyer in a case of professional misconduct. In 2023, the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal (LCDT) applied a 'merciful approach' when assessing the lawyer's misconduct and health issues. In 'Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Ms W' [2023], the LCDT discussed the impacts of reproductive treatment in relation to the practitioner's conduct. This decision is the foundation to compare the disciplinary regime for legal and health practitioners in New Zealand. The article outlines New Zealand's framework for discipline of lawyers, noting the absence of a health pathway. The article discusses opportunities to resolve cases involving impaired lawyers outside the disciplinary system, including benefits and disadvantages of mandatory reporting. While focusing on the legal profession, the discussion is relevant to other professions and examines health-promoting regulatory strategies from other jurisdictions.
ISSN:1321-8719
1934-1687
DOI:10.1080/13218719.2024.2340098