Neil Sands
Leading women’s legal groups have urged the New Zealand Law Society (NZLS) to reject disgraced lawyer James Gardner-Hopkins’ bid to practise again, saying that allowing him back would undermine efforts to stop sexual harassment in the legal profession.
Gardner-Hopkins, a former partner at Russell McVeagh, was suspended for three years in 2022 for sexual misconduct and applied to regain his practising certificate in March this year after the penalty period expired.
The NZLS Practice Approval Committee called for submissions after receiving the application and is still considering Gardner-Hopkins’ fate.
While the NZLS committee does not have public hearings on such cases and has refused to guarantee its decision will be made public, a number of groups have released their submissions.
All these groups – Auckland Women Lawyers’ Association (AWLA), Wellington Women Lawyers’ Association (WWLA), the New Zealand Women’s Law Journal and Aotearoa Legal Workers’ Union (ALWU) – raise concerns at the prospect of Gardner-Hopkins practising again.
“Granting Mr Gardner-Hopkins a practising certificate would undermine the integrity of the profession and send a deeply troubling message to the public about the legal community,” WWLA said.
“The requirement to be a ‘fit-and-proper person’ is not merely about legal competence but also about character, integrity and adherence to ethical standards. The onus in on Mr Gardner-Hopkins to satisfy the Law Society of his fitness.”
‘Attitude of entitlement’
Gardner-Hopkins was suspended after the Lawyers & Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal found against him on six counts of sexual misconduct against five summer interns at two Russell McVeagh social events in December 2015.
Four of the women were subjected to intimate non-consensual touching and a fifth engaged in consensual sexual activity with Gardner-Hopkins.
“Mr Gardner-Hopkins has not made a public apology or otherwise publicly evidenced any remorse, self-reflection or amends to account for his offending,” ALWU said.
The union suggested “the appropriate penalty for Mr Gardner-Hopkins’ misconduct was to strike him off” and said NZLS needed to rigorously assess any claims that he was now a fit-and-proper person to practise.
“Box-ticking claims to amends or improved behaviour or habits should not suffice,” it added.
When it handed down the suspension in 2022, the tribunal advised Gardner-Hopkins to engage a mentor and therapist to address issues including problematic alcohol consumption and poor understanding of professional boundaries.
AWLA said it had no information about whether Gardner-Hopkins had followed the recommendation but accused him of “conduct inconsistent with the spirit of the tribunal’s orders” while suspended.
It cited an attempt to put him forward as a representative in Environment Court proceedings [which the court refused] and his bid to join an expert panel deciding a fast-track resource consent [which was also refused but went to the Court of Appeal].
“These actions… suggest a lack of insight and/or an attitude of entitlement, inconsistent with fitness,” AWLA said, noting that “a practising certificate is a privilege, not a right”.
Me Too moment
LawNews approached Gardner-Hopkins for comment on his application and on the submissions made about his case, but has received no response.
The case rocked the legal profession, with the tribunal linking it to the ‘Me Too’ movement, sparking widespread scrutiny of workplace culture.
The NZ Women’s Law Journal said the culture and structures that enabled Gardner-Hopkins’ offending meant there could be an ongoing risk if he rejoined the profession.
More broadly, it questioned the message that issuing a practising certificate would send to the profession and Gardner-Hopkins’ victims, who the tribunal said suffered an “incalculable impact” from his actions.
“The Journal’s position is that issuing a practising certificate condones sexual assault and harassment within the profession, writ large,” it said.
“It also undermines the efforts of those who compromised their career prospects in order for someone who is not fit and proper to be held accountable for their failings. Of course, if Mr Gardner-Hopkins is issued a practising certificate, their efforts will count for little.”
ALWU criticised NZLS’s record on such cases.
“Historically, the Law Society has not dealt with sexual misconduct claims with the seriousness or timeliness that justice and safety demand.” it said. “At its most basic level, to fulfil its function as a regulator the Law Society must ensure the fit-and-proper requirement is an effective, serious test to uphold the safety of members and clients of our profession.”
0 Comments