27 Jul 2018
KEENE v LEGAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW OFFICER [2018] NZHC 1869
- Citation
- [2018] NZAR 1361
- Court
- High Court
The LCRO erred in law by treating the mere fact a lawyer had a financial interest in litigation as a breach of r13.5; financial interest alone does not compromise advocacy independence. Conversely, r13.5.3 requires a contextual/materiality assessment: it is engaged where the lawyer's conduct or advice is a materially relevant issue in the proceedings. Applying that test here, Keene's conduct and advice were in issue from the outset and central by the time of the High Court appeal, so the Standards Committee's finding under r13.5.3 must stand. Consequently the LCRO's contrary determinations we…