An unnamed partner from an unnamed law firm has been suspended from practising for 15 months and ordered to pay compensation and costs totalling $68,355 for drunken behaviour, described by the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal as “outrageous”, “disgraceful” and “dishonourable”, at two of his firm’s Christmas parties.
The penalty, handed down last week, came after a liability hearing in March, when the lawyer was found guilty of serious misconduct.
His behaviour and comments, most of which are too graphic to recount here, included grabbing a junior solicitor’s penis in front of a group of colleagues at a staff Christmas party and performing what the tribunal described as “an action” with it.
The lawyer, referred to by the tribunal as Mr ZKA, also commented to a female summer clerk (Ms D) about the size of another colleague’s penis while yet another employee, he said, was “definitely gay”. The man’s wife, said Mr ZKA, “probably gets nothing from him. She’ll be going elsewhere, probably hiring people to give it to her.”
At the second event two weeks later – a Christmas party themed around the nativity – Mr ZKA dressed up as a shepherd with a six-foot-long bamboo stake for a crook. He used this to prod Ms D – a move she later described as being “poked up the bottom”. Mr ZKA also touched the buttocks of a male summer clerk, both with the end of his bamboo crook and with his hand. This upset the summer clerk who wanted to throw a punch but was persuaded to desist. Mr ZKA also disrupted a quiz, organised by his firm, by loudly shouting obscenities about the summer clerks and was eventually evicted from the event by one of his fellow partners.
Mr ZKA later described his conduct at the event as “jokey”, “gregarious” and “just playful” and said he had not intended to hurt or upset anyone.
In evidence before the tribunal, Ms D said on several occasions during these events she tried to remove herself from Mr ZKA’s conversations but was conscious of not wanting the jeopardise her chances of landing a graduate role with the firm by offending one of its partners.
The tribunal heard that Mr ZKA had been reluctant to attend the Christmas parties as he suffered from social awkwardness and high levels of anxiety which caused him to drink heavily at events and behave poorly. But avoiding firm events wasn’t an option, he had been told, and at one point his remuneration was cut by 10% because of his failure to attend.
The tribunal accepted that while his conduct was disgraceful, he was not behaving in “a strictly sexual or predatory manner directed at any one person, though his conduct had sexual elements to it”. He had been “completely out of control” on both occasions, it said.
It also noted he had a blemish-free disciplinary record for 27 years before these events and there had been no incidents in the five years since then.
Mr ZKA had self-referred to a psychologist, and later a psychiatrist, in an attempt to rehabilitate and to understand the root causes of his drinking. He had now been sober for four years. These factors meant his period of suspension was significantly lower than it would otherwise have been, the tribunal said. Providing he abstained from alcohol, there was no risk of him reoffending in a similar way. Without alcohol, Mr ZHA was a “skilful and solid lawyer and a considerate and supportive colleague and mentor”, the tribunal said.
Mr ZKA has been granted interim name suppression until his appeal rights expire.
Read the tribunal’s liability decision here
Read the tribunal’s penalty decision here
0 Comments