21 Aug 2014
ORLOV v THE NZ LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2014] NZHC 1987
- Citation
- [2014] NZHC 1987
- Court
- High Court
The High Court held the late amendments to reframe the charges as allegations that statements were false or made without sufficient foundation were legally appropriate and, despite procedural defects, caused no substantial prejudice; the Disciplinary Tribunal properly admitted and weighed documentary and witness material under s239; absolute privilege for defamation did not immunise the applicant from professional discipline; freedom of expression is a relevant mitigating factor but does not protect unfounded, extreme allegations by a lawyer about a judge; the convictions on the amended s7(1)…