LawNews - Issue 28

NEWS Aug 20, 2021 Issue 28

Inside ■ LITIGATION

Regulation looming for litigation funders P03

■ INTERNATIONAL LAW

Targeted by the Taliban P05

The perils of

adls.org.nz

LITIGATION FUNDING

Contents 03 LITIGATION CONFLICT OF INTEREST PARAMETERS

Curbing the cowboys: why litigation funders need regulating

LawNews is an official publication of Auckland District Law Society Inc. (ADLS).

05 TALIBAN RULE OF LAW THREATS

Afghanistan’s 250 women judges fear for their lives

Editor: Jenni McManus Publisher: ADLS Editorial and contributor enquiries to: Jenni McManus 021 971 598 Jenni.Mcmanus@adls.org.nz Advertising enquiries to: Darrell Denney 021 936 858 Darrell.Denney@adls.org.nz

06-07 INTERPRETERS LITERACY CULTURE

Why migrants struggle with jury service

All mail to: ADLS, Level 4, Chancery Chambers, 2 Chancery Street, Auckland 1010 PO Box 58, Shortland Street DX CP24001, Auckland 1140, adls.org.nz

06 08 EVENTS

LawNews is published weekly (with the exception of a small period over the Christmas holiday break) and is available free of charge to members of ADLS, and available by subscription to non-members for $140 (plus GST) per year.

To subscribe, please email reception@adls.org.nz.

10-11 FEATURED CPD

Photo: duncan1890 / Getty Images

12 CPD IN BRIEF

Historically, jurors tended to be of a single gender and ethnicity

©COPYRIGHT and DISCLAIMER Material from this publication must not be reproduced in whole or part without permission. The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and, unless stated, may not reflect the opinions or views of ADLS or its members.

Responsibility for such views and for the correctness of the information within their articles lies with the authors.

Cover: Driendl Group / Getty Images

02

Aug 20 2021 Issue 28

LITIGATION

Why litigation funders need regulation If our focus is to make civil justice more accessible to the general public, then we need to make it timely and affordable and regulation needs to reflect this goal David Friar

Rod Vaughan The Law Commission is expected to release a report next month addressing the level of controls that should be imposed on litigation funders.

It comes in the wake of the mid-trial collapse of the $220 million James Hardie leaky-building class action, with no compensation to aggrieved homeowners who were forced into settlement when the funder, London-based Harbour Litigation Funding, pulled the plug. The final agreement saw the funder pay James Hardie $1.25m towards its costs.

Harbour said it was not willing to keep funding the case when it no longer believed it could be won.

In an earlier discussion paper, the Law Commission asked for feedback on whether regulations should require minimum terms in all litigation funding agreements and, if so, whether the regulations should set out the terms on which a funder can end the funding or discontinue or settle a case.

Litigator David Friar says the James Hardie case illustrates one of the pitfalls of such actions. While litigation funding and class actions might offer access to justice in circumstances where claimants may not otherwise have access to the courts, they come with a number of downsides.

Friar, who heads the litigation department at Bell Gully, says because litigation funders are investing their own money in bringing a case, they will demand a level of control over key decisions.

“These include which lawyers to use, which expert witnesses to use, when to settle and when to walk away. A funder will want to protect its investment. However, that control comes at a cost to claimants, who also have an interest in the case.”

Friar says in contrast to funders, claimants’ interests may not be limited to financial interests; they may also want to have their claims considered by a judge and their rights vindicated. Those interests are removed if the funder takes control of the case.

“The only limits on litigation funders at the moment are the common law doctrines prohibiting abuses of process and

contracts contrary to public policy,” he says. “It has proved difficult for litigation funding agreements to be challenged under these doctrines.”

Friar says the law relating to funder control also remains unsettled. “For example, in PwC v Walker [2017] NZSC 151, the majority in the Supreme Court was comfortable with the level of control the funder had in that case. Elias CJ, however, considered the funder’s control over settlement or discontinuance in that case to be sufficiently substantial to potentially amount to an abuse of process.

“In my view, given the lack of protection for claimants in relation to funders and funding agreements in the New Zealand market, it’s important to have a sufficient regulatory baseline to protect claimants. In the absence of that protection, claimants will continue to remain exposed.”

Conflicts of interest Nikki Chamberlain

If nothing is done, then litigation funders will continue to operate within very few boundaries in New Zealand and the judiciary will continue to grapple with the ambit of its powers in reining in funders

Similar sentiments are expressed by Auckland Law School senior lecturer Nikki Chamberlain who is on the Law Commission’s expert advisory panel reviewing class actions and litigation funding.

She told LawNews the lack of regulation means there can be conflicts of interest between the funders, class plaintiffs and class solicitors in relation to the control, running and settlement of the litigation.

“The courts have been reluctant to get involved in monitoring the terms of litigation funding agreements,” she says.

“In PwC v Walker Justice Glazebrook commented that it was not the role of the courts to act as general regulators of funding agreements. Nor was it the role of the courts to assess the merits or fairness of bargains between third party funders and plaintiffs.

“The courts’ role is to merely adjudicate on any application brought before them in a proceeding, which may in certain situations involve issues around the funding agreement.”

Chamberlain says litigation funding regulation is needed so third party funders can provide access to justice where not otherwise available while also having clear boundaries within which they must operate so they cannot take advantage of potential vulnerable plaintiffs.

“This could include regulation around capital adequacy requirements and contractual terms between the parties, such as the length of the notice period required to terminate the

Continued on page 04 03

Continued from page 03

funding arrangement.

“If nothing is done, then litigation funders will continue to operate within very few boundaries in New Zealand and the judiciary will continue to grapple with the ambit of its powers in reining in funders.”

Bad actors Chamberlain says all parties can lose out if there is no regulation.

“Both the plaintiff class and defendants may be concerned with who has control over the litigation and funders themselves may be concerned about unreputable funders entering the market and hurting their public perception which, in the end, may impact access to justice.

“The adoption of legislation means there will be specific parameters within which litigation funders operate in funding class action litigation. For example, legislation can regulate on the boundaries of litigation funding agreements and litigation management and strategy.

“Legislation can also clearly indicate who is responsible for ensuring that funders adhere to the regulations and enforcing the regulations, whether by the courts or alternatively by a third party watchdog.”

Chamberlain says several common law jurisdictions that may be relevant to New Zealand regulate litigation funders “In particular, we can learn from our closest neighbour’s, Australia’s, experience in this space – its successes and failures – and, in turn, form a view on the parameters of our own regulation, moving forward.

“There is a balance to be struck in any regulation. The funder bears the burden and risk to a large extent if they fund the litigation. As a result, regulation needs to acknowledge their role in making the proceeding happen in addition to protecting the parties involved in the proceeding.”

All of which is little comfort for homeowners left high and dry by the collapse of the James Hardie leaky-building class action lawsuit.

They believed they had a good case and could prove that James Hardie’s cement-fibre exterior cladding systems were defective, causing their homes to leak.

But despite the years of pre-trial preparation, and an impressive line-up of expert witnesses, it all came to nothing when Harbour Litigation Funding bailed out.

04

Funder risk

The party funding the case must have the ability to protect its investment, including withdrawing or settling a case which is no longer meritorious

Jonathon Woodhams, a director of New Zealand litigation funder LPF, says while the plaintiffs in the case may feel disappointed by the outcome, it should not result in regulations that prevent a funder withdrawing from a case once funding has commenced.

“Litigation can take many years to conclude - more than 10 years in the case of Feltex – and during this time circumstances often change. A witness may not come up to brief, experts may change their opinion, new cases may interpret the law differently.

“The party funding the case, whether it is the plaintiff or defendant themselves or a third party such as a litigation funder or insurance company in the case of defendants, must have the ability to protect its investment, including withdrawing or settling a case which is no longer meritorious or the prospects of success have significantly reduced.”

Woodhams says the James Hardie case, along with Shadowclad, Feltex, and Steel and Tube, illustrates the significant risks facing funders.

“On the basis of statements in the media that James Hardie has spent $25m on its defence, it is possible that Harbour Litigation has lost in aggregate over $40m across the cases mentioned and the plaintiffs were left high and dry.

“That’s a lose-lose scenario. This demonstrates the level of complexity around case selection and the magnitude of funder losses, both time and money, if cases are unsuccessful. If our focus is to make civil justice more accessible to the general public, then we need to make it timely and affordable and regulation needs to reflect this goal.

“Introducing regulations that add risks to a funder only serves to make funding more expensive which decreases the prospect of plaintiffs being able to bring meritorious cases to the court and fails to address accountability of defendants for harm done.

“Any proposed regulatory framework should target arbitrary funders who lack the ability to finance a case in its entirety or don’t have a long-term commitment to the New Zealand jurisdiction or, worse, ambulance-chasing lawyers who are funding their own cases without regard to conflicts of interest that arise when they have significant financial stake in the outcome of the litigation.”

LawNews also sought comment from Adina Thorn, the Auckland lawyer who organised the James Hardie case for homeowners. We were told she was on leave and unavailable to answer our questions.

For an upcoming ADLS seminar click here ■

Aug 20 2021 Issue 28

INTERNATIONAL LAW

Targeted by the Taliban: Afghanistan’s embattled female judges Women judges are particularly at risk of revenge attacks because the Taliban and their allies consider it unacceptable for women to sit in judgment over men Jenni McManus In her capacity as newly-elected President of the International Association of Women Judges (IAWJ), Supreme Court judge Susan Glazebrook is calling on the government to include Afghan women judges and their families in the special measures being extended to interpreters, journalists and other personnel who provided essential service to foreign military forces in Afghanistan.

Specifically, Justice Glazebrook wants the government to help secure safe passage and refuge for women judges and their families who face grave danger now the Taliban has taken control of Afghanistan.

There are 250 women judges in Afghanistan. While all members of the judiciary are at risk under the Supreme Court judge Susan Glazebrook Taliban’s rule, women judges are a particular target, she says.

The level of risk was made clear to New Zealand Justice Glazebrook says. “We have no reason to be judges and senior members of the legal profession optimistic today. Women at the IAWJ’s biennial judges are particularly at conference in Auckland in Due to the nature of risk of revenge attacks May. Thirty-seven Afghan their work and the past because the Taliban and women judges attended the conference remotely rulings they have made in their allies consider it unacceptable for women to and some spoke of their criminal, anti-corruption sit in judgment over men.” constant fear and the daily and family courts, the She has been in contact risk they faced by simply with women judges in women judges and their going to work.

Afghanistan in recent days.

Earlier this year, two families face real danger They were already facing female Afghan judges were great personal risk but she gunned down on their way says the events of the past to work. week place them under immediate and ongoing threat.

“We know from the last time that the Taliban came “They are understandably frightened and the IAWJ to power in the 1990s that judges were targeted,”

is very concerned for their safety. Due to the nature of their work and the past rulings they have made in criminal, anti-corruption and family courts, the women judges and their families face real danger,” Justice Glazebrook says.

“We understand the Taliban has already released prisoners, even from the high security prisons, and that judges are receiving calls with threats along the lines of ‘where will you hide now?’

“Women judges have helped establish the rule of law in their country, an essential pillar of a democratic state. Allowing them to be at the mercy of the Taliban and insurgent groups, given what they have sacrificed, would be tragic indeed.”

Afghan women judges have forged strong connections with the New Zealand judiciary in recent years. In 2013, New Zealand hosted six judges from Afghanistan, who visited courts and organisations such as Women’s Refuge, following an IAWJ regional conference. This connection creates a responsibility to act, Justice Glazebrook says.

“The international community, including New Zealand, encouraged the women of Afghanistan to take up their studies and to take on positions of responsibility in the community.

“Members of our judiciary have been supporting these judges in their roles for many years. Now they need more than our support – they need us to act quickly to secure their safety. I call upon the government to offer some of these courageous women judges and their families safe passage and refuge here in Aotearoa New Zealand as part of the humanitarian response to this situation.”

Similar calls have come from across the Tasman where the Law Council of Australia and the Australian Bar Association have urged their government to continue working with its international allies to protect and assist vulnerable Afghans, including the offering of safe passage asylum to those wanting to leave the country.

Both organisations have spoken of the ‘terrible risk’ to judges and lawyers and all others who have worked to defend the rule of law in Afghanistan and to support and establish democratic and justice institutions during the past 20 years. ■ 05

CRIMINAL LAW/IMMIGRATION

Multiple barriers deter migrants from jury service Migrants and refugees face additional language and psychological barriers that make participating in jury service both intimidating and functionally difficult

Isaac Lam & Molly So

proceedings being almost exclusively in English and the lack of interpretive support available to those with lesser Trial by jury has been an integral part of the criminal English proficiency. law for centuries. Historically, juries have been valued Language barriers are typically as a check against both the insulated worldviews of the first issue that comes to mind the often-privileged judiciary and potential political when considering the challenges that interference. By involving ordinary citizens in these multiculturalism poses to juries, and questions, juries help to ensure judicial decisions for good reason. A study Smith cited reflect the values of the broader population.

Isaac Lam claimed four in 10 juries included However, for this function to be effective, juries a person who struggled to hold an must be representative of the population. The proportion of New Zealanders born overseas has been everyday conversation in English.

The resources containing jury increasing, reaching 27.4% in 2018. As the population becomes increasingly diverse, representation becomes summons information, both in summons letters and online, were difficult to increasingly difficult to ensure. navigate for New Zealanders with low Selection and exemption levels of English proficiency. Much of the information uses technical legal Under the current system, juries are selected through terminology that a random draw from the population Molly So jurors at beginner living in the court’s jury district.

A study claimed levels of English This system has been known to four in 10 juries would struggle to understand. over-represent privileged and older included a person This problem continues in the demographics. Summoned jurors courtrooms. Although only ‘basic can seek exemptions from service who struggled to English’ is required of which younger and poorer jurors hold an everyday everyday jurors when summoned, several often do as they simply cannot conversation in respondents stressed that the afford to take time off to serve. language used in courtrooms On top of these money and English cannot be described as basic. time issues, migrants and refugees Analyses of courtroom language face additional language and have identified that courtroom discussions are psychological barriers that make participating in jury significantly harder to follow. service both intimidating and functionally difficult.

In 2014, Hilary Smith submitted a report to the No translation Ministry of Justice (MOJ) highlighting issues New Translations of jury information are not generally Zealanders from refugee and migrant backgrounds available. In 2014, only one sentence in the summons faced in jury service. This focused primarily on 06

information pack sent by mail was translated into Māori and 12 other languages: “If you think you may have trouble understanding the trial, you should speak to a member of staff at the court.”

Information about which court staff should be contacted and how the courts could be reached was not translated and unclear, leading to a confusing and lengthy process for some who sought exemptions because of English language ability.

At least one respondent recounted a situation where the recipient could not understand the summons information and could not understand what he had to do.

Since Smith’s 2014 report, some changes have made jury summons materials slightly more intuitive to navigate, even for those with low English proficiency. One section of the summons letters is translated into 13 different languages: “Court trials are in English. If you can understand and speak English in a group conversation, you should understand enough English to be on a jury. If you’re worried about understanding the trial, talk to court staff.”

Details of the telephone number, email address and a map of the relevant court are now listed right above this section. This remains all that has been translated, however.

Respondents told of how discussions in the jury room were difficult to keep up with. As people in court tend to look down as they speak, discussions can be hard to follow for foreign language speakers who rely on visual cues. The stenographer is not required to record the proceedings in writing, impacting jurors who may wish to revise the discussions. As jury room discussions are strictly confidential, research on this aspect of the jury process is limited and could overlook other issues.

Continued on page 07

Aug 20 2021

Photo: Aleutie / Getty Images

Issue 28

Continued from page 06 The interpretive support available to jurors is still unclear. Smith found no information about whether translation or interpretation support was available to jurors with low levels of English language proficiency; the only interpretive support available appeared to be for jurors with disabilities. Interpretive support still appears to be available only for parties going to court.

Psychological barriers Less immediately apparent are psychological barriers from certain aspects of the jury process that may intimidate overseas-born New Zealanders or discourage them from believing they are fit for jury duty.

Some testimonies Smith cites say the lack of procedural clarity made some second-language English speakers deem themselves unfit to sit on a jury.

One respondent noted that some low, mid and pre-intermediate English students were ‘horrified’ that they could be sending someone to jail and sought language-based exemptions on that thought alone. Another account came from a former lawyer trained overseas, who felt anxious that his weaker English language abilities could cause him to easily misunderstand details and thus cloud the

refugees could hurt the integrity of the New Zealand criminal system and therefore should not serve on juries. But Smith notes the lack of understanding of courtroom procedures is not a uniquely migrant or refugee issue but a general problem for jurors in New Zealand. She argues the better solution is to provide better explanatory materials, which currently do not cater well to those less fluent in English.

Another psychological barrier is the controversial challenge process during jury selection. Before a case is heard, parties can challenge whether jurors are fit to sit on the jury, often without having to give a reason.

Smith provides an account of two people who turned up to attend jury service but felt “very intimidated by the officious officials and overwhelmed by the proceedings” and after being challenged “felt it was possibly anti-Asian”.

The challenge process can be intimidating and jury’s judgment. embarrassing for someone who may not understand This preemptory self-selection out of jury it. The jurors being challenged are singled out and in duty is undesirable. Juries have already seen front of everyone while the parties and their lawyers an overrepresentation of wealthier and older whisper and point at them. demographics. Excessively stringent self-selection In other jurisdictions where the out of jury service on a wide scale challenge process has been studied would further entrench this dynamic.

Many migrants in detail, ethnicity and background is Smith argues this could be and refugees a common ground for challenges. In avoided by clarifying the standard fear the courts Australia, when non-white defendants of English proficiency required for are being trialed in criminal cases, jury service. This has been revised because of prosecutors often seek to exclude slightly since 2014 to read: “If you can experiences jurors who share a common ethnic understand and speak English in a with unsafe background with the victim, fearing group conversation”. However, this they would be over-sympathetic still requires self-evaluation. legal systems towards the victim. in their former Culture and compatibility Being challenged off a jury can home countries be a stressful experience, particularly These psychological barriers extend for migrants and refugees, who are beyond language issues to cultural likely to also be ethnic minorities. differences. Many migrants and They could perceive the process as being racially refugees fear the courts because of experiences with discriminatory or a personal attack on the integrity of unsafe legal systems in their former home countries. their citizenship. Being challenged off a jury because Migrants from countries with legal systems based on of ethnicity might feel akin to being told one was too religious law (such as sharia) or socialist law (such as foreign to have a say in the laws of New Zealand or in communist or formerly communist countries) may be unfamiliar with the concept and role of the jury.

These issues are controversial and tempting to Continued on page 13 politicise. They raise concerns that migrants and 07

Events Featured events

Connecting New Zealand Lawyers

Rotorua lawyers’ lunch Wednesday 1 September, 12.30pm – 2pm Ambrosia Restaurant, 1096 Tutanekai Street, Rotorua Sponsored by MAS

Upcoming September

Wednesday 1 | Rotorua lawyers’ lunch Wednesday 8 | Albany lawyers’ lunch, Auckland Thursday 16 | ADLS annual breakfast with the Attorney-General, Auckland Wednesday 29 | New Plymouth sundowner

Learn More

Albany lawyers’ lunch Wednesday 8 September, 12.30pm – 2pm The Merchant Pub Co., 219 Don McKinnon Drive, Albany Sponsored by MAS Learn More

Soon to be added: October October | South Auckland lawyers’ lunch October | Tauranga lawyers’ lunch October | ADLS annual golf tournament

November

November | Hawke’s Bay lawyers’ lunch November | Auckland central lawyers’ lunch November | Nelson sundowner

ADLS annual breakfast with the Attorney-General Thursday 16 September, 7.15am – 8.30am The Northern Club, 19 Princes Street, Auckland

Learn More

New Plymouth sundowner Wednesday 29 September, 5.30pm – 7.30pm The Pepper Room, Millennium Hotel, New Plymouth Waterfront Catering sponsored by MAS Learn More

Book Here

events@adls.org.nz

08

adls.org.nz

They’re ready when you are The ADLS Work Experience programme gives law students the chance to put years of study into practice – your practice.

They’re ready They’reyou ready when are We’re looking for part-time paid work experience opportunities around New Zealand. You provide the opportunity – and we’ll connect your firm to the bright minds who’ll become brilliant law professionals.

when you are They’re ready

They’re ready They’re They’reready ready when you are when you are when you are POST A JOB adls.org.nz The ADLS Work Experience programme gives law students The ADLS Work Experience programme gives lawlaw students The ADLS Work Experience programme gives students the chance to put years of study into practice – your practice.

GET IN TOUCH thethe chance toto put years ofof study into practice – your practice. chance put years study into practice – your practice.

We’relooking looking forpart-time part-time (preferably paid) work experience 09 303 5270 (preferably We’re for paid) work experience We’re looking for part-time (preferably paid) work experience opportunities around New Zealand.

You provide the opportunities around New Zealand.

You provide thethe opportunities around New Zealand.

You provide EMAIL US opportunity – and we’ll connect your firm to the bright opportunity – and we’ll connect your firm toto thethe bright opportunity – and we’ll connect your firm bright minds who’ll become brilliant law professionals. workexperience@adls.org.nz minds who’ll become brilliant lawlaw professionals. minds who’ll become brilliant professionals.

POST JOB adls.org.nz GET IN TOUCH 09 303 5275 POST AAA JOB ININ TOUCH 0909 303 5275 POST JOBadls.org.nz adls.org.nz GET GET TOUCH 303 5275 EMAIL US workexperience@adls.org.nz EMAIL US EMAIL USworkexperience@adls.org.nz workexperience@adls.org.nz

The ADLS Work Experience programme gives law st the chance to put years of study into practice – your

when you are

The ADLS Work Experience programme gives law students

We’re looking foryears part-time (preferably paid) work ex the chance to put of study into practice – your pract opportunities around New Zealand. You provide the We’re forExperience part-timeprogramme (preferably paid) work experien Thelooking ADLS Work gives law students opportunity – and we’ll connect your firm tothe the brig opportunities Zealand.

You provide the chance toaround put yearsNew of study into practice – your practice. minds who’ll– become brilliantyour law firm professionals. opportunity and we’ll connect to the bright We’re looking for part-time (preferably paid) work experience

minds who’ll become brilliant lawYou professionals. opportunities around New Zealand. provide the

opportunity – and we’ll connect your firm to the bright minds brilliant law professionals.

POST A who’ll JOBbecome adls.org.nz GET IN TOUCH

09 303

POST AUS JOBworkexperience@adls.org.nz adls.org.nz GET IN TOUCH 09 303 5275 EMAIL EMAIL US workexperience@adls.org.nz POST A JOB adls.org.nz GET IN TOUCH 09 303 5275 EMAIL US workexperience@adls.org.nz

FEATURED CPD

FINAL NOTICE

CONDUCT CLIENT RESPONSIBILITY

Class and funded litigation Seminar & Live Stream 2 CPD hrs Tues 24 August 4pm – 6.15pm Presenters Paul Collins; Philip Skelton QC; Angela Parlane and Jonathan Woodhams

Knowing your professional obligations The rapid growth in class and funded litigation has exposed issues and challenges not encountered in regular litigation and where the Conduct and Client Care Rules do not always fit neatly. This seminar is intended to help lawyers navigate this difficult and potentially perilous field.

IN PERSON

FINAL NOTICE

Taking the opportunity

Webinar 1.5 CPD hrs Thurs 26 August 12pm – 1.30pm Presenters Katie Gray, executive coach, lawyer and founder of Principals of Practice and Carmel Byrne, partner, Stepshift

STRATEGIES COVID-19 STRESS

LIVE STREAM

Taking the opportunity: supporting your team through challenge.

Providing high-quality advice while meeting client demands on cost and timeframe are difficult for lawyers, especially when you add a global pandemic into the mix. In this webinar, the presenters will share recent research and findings on the causes of employee burnout (including remote working burnout experienced as a result of Covid-19) and ways legal leaders can mitigate this risk.

FIND OUT MORE

FINAL NOTICE

INTERACTIVE PRACTICAL FEEDBACK

Cross-examination workshop Workshop 4 CPD hrs Sat 28 August 9am – 1.15pm Facilitators Marie Dyhrberg QC, Paul Dacre QC, Paul Borich QC, Rachael Reed QC, Julie-Anne Kincade QC, Ish Jayanandan, Panama Le’Au’Anae and Aieyah Shendi

Learn more about how to properly plan and define your objectives for cross-examination.

Build up your cross-examination confidence by engaging in practical learn-bydoing sessions, where you conduct the cross-examination and watch others as well, and also receive individual feedback.

Meet colleagues and engage in a challenging learning experience with them.

Moderators Judge Gerard Winter and Judge David Sharp FIND OUT MORE

10

Aug 20 2021 Issue 28

adls.org.nz/cpd

Expert evidence on memory SCIENCE EXPERT EVIDENCE

In Person | Live Stream 2 CPD hrs Tue 7 September 5pm – 7.15pm Presenters Rob Harrison, barrister, Inangahua Chambers and Dr Rachel Zajac, expert witness and Professor of Psychology, University of Otago | Te Whare Wānanga o Otāgo IN PERSON

cpd@adls.org.nz

09 303 5278

A case can turn on memory. So when should you engage an expert? With reference to the Peter Ellis trial and other relevant ‘memory’ cases, an experienced barrister and an experienced expert witness will explain how memory works, the types of issues that can arise in criminal cases and how to use a memory expert.

Chair Judge David Sharp

LIVE STREAM

Burning Issues Forum 2021 EMPLOYMENT LEGISLATION REINSTATEMEMNT

Forum 2 CPD hrs Thursday 23 September 4pm - 6pm Presenters Philip Skelton QC, Bankside Chambers; Mere King, Partner, Buddle Findlay; Liz Coats, Partner, Bell Gully; Shelley Kopu, Principal, Shelley Kopu Law and Rosemary Wooders, Senior associate, Bell Gully

Legal ethics and client care: a practical guide

Cast aside your scarf and hat and warm yourself at the boiling vat that is the Burning Issues Forum 2021. Come see the flickering fangs of orange torch the scorching cauldron’s bottom! Legislation, reinstatement, tikanga and name suppression are some of the scolding hot topics that will be served, crackling and steaming, at this, our annual inferno. And though our eyebrows singed may be, we’ll sit in awesome reverie, ‘til the smoke clears, leaving clarity!

Chair Rachael Judge, senior associate, Simpson Grierson FIND OUT MORE

Seminar | Live Stream 1.5 CPD hrs Wednesday 8 September 4pm – 5.30pm Presenters Michael Taylor, partner, Russell McVeagh and Joanna Trezise, senior solicitor, Russell McVeagh

PRACTICAL DUTIES CONFLICTS

IN PERSON

Refresh your understanding of your duties and responsibilities when it comes to client relationships and learn how to apply the theory of legal ethics to real world scenarios which commonly arise in legal practice. This session will be particularly useful for practitioners at the junior or intermediate level of experience, but will also provide a helpful refresher for more senior practitioners.

LIVE STREAM 11

CPD IN BRIEF

Cyber security: a guide for law firms

Unit titles: dealing with complexity

Seminar | Live Stream 1.5 CPD hrs Tuesday 14 September 4pm – 5.30pm Presenters Lloyd Gallagher, Gallagher & Co; Arran Hunt, Stace Hammond; Edwin Lim, Hudson Gavin Martin and Campbell McKenzie, Incident Response Solutions

“It takes 20 years to build a reputation and few minutes of cyber-incident to ruin it” – Stephane Nappo (Global Head Information Security for Société Générale International Banking since 2011).

The risk to cybersecurity is real. You should treat it as a matter of when, rather than if, your firm will be hacked. For many NZ law firms, the once unthinkable has already happened. Our experienced panel will provide practical guidance on what you can do to bolster your defences in the face of faceless, innumerable and ever-inventive enemies.

Seminar | Live Stream 2 CPD hours Thursday 16 September 4pm – 6pm Presenters Joanna Pidgeon; Thomas Gibbons and Vicki Toan Chair Liza Fry-Irvine, director, Liza Fry-Irvine Law

This seminar will be packed with a great selection of pertinent and practical topics relating to unit titles and bodies corporate, presented by experienced lawyers, and a body corporate manager. We will cover: the consequences of unit title developments being complex communities comprising any combination of owner-occupiers, tenants, social housing, commercial activities and more; and meetings, committees and complexity: body corporate governance and complex cases – an update.

IN PERSON

IN PERSON

Running an effective jury trial

Excellence in legal writing (Nelson)

LIVE STREAM

Conference 7 CPD hours Saturday 18 September 9am – 5.30pm Presenters Marie Dyhrberg QC; Paul Dacre QC; Julie-Anne Kincade QC; Simon Lance; Ish Jayanandan; Guyon Foley and Maxine Pitch Chair Judge David McNaughton

Jury trials require a specific set of advocacy skills. Given the serious nature of cases heard in a jury trial setting, getting it wrong can have significant implications for the accused – and for defence counsel. Aptitude in preparation and presentation is key. During this intensive day and in a collaborative environment, attendees will receive guidance on jury trial advocacy skills from a panel of highly experienced and well-regarded presenters.

Workshop 3 CPD hours Monday 20 September 11am – 2.15pm Facilitator Andrea Ewing, Crown Counsel, Crown Law Office (Criminal Team)

This workshop will introduce you to three simple hacks to improve your written work: writing concretely; writing actively; and writing less. It builds on the work of linguistic experts, notably Helen Sword and Steven Pinker. But never fear: the words “subordinate clause” will not feature. We’ll also deploy a fourth tool – “point-first advocacy” – to structure arguments for maximum impact. This learn-by-doing workshop will help you achieve writing excellence.

FIND OUT MORE

Limited spaces available.

FIND OUT MORE

Remedies: Breach of Mandate & Licence Fee Damages Tuesday 21 September | Seminar & Live Stream | 1.5 CPD hours Visit adls.org.nz for more information.

12

LIVE STREAM

Aug 20 2021 Issue 28

ADLS CPD EVENT

Cybersecurity has become a norm in the way we do business.

Every law firm is subject to risk and attack from the increasing cyber-threats floating around the internet.

Many see cybersecurity as something to worry about only after an attack happens and consider the cost of cyber-threat protection to be too high.

But there are simple ways to protect yourself right now by developing strategies that won’t cost the partners another mortgage.

The risk to cybersecurity is real. You should treat it as a matter of when, rather than if, your firm will be hacked. New regulations and sanctions are now the norm, with some falling into criminal sanction. Firms can no longer turn a blind eye.

For many New Zealand law firms, the onceunthinkable has already become reality, with a breach and the high cost of recovery causing anxiety to partners. And there’s also the attempt to salvage your reputation with clients, manage a breach of the Rules of Conduct and Client Care, an investigation by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, the risk of criminal sanction under s 118 of the Privacy Act 2020, the increased insurance premiums (if you can still get cover) and the need to get your data back.

Cybersecurity is no longer something to deal with after you’ve come under attack. It needs to happen

Continued from page 07

that one’s cultural background was incompatible with what the laws hold out New Zealand to be.

Challenges are a controversial part of the jury process; many critics from jurisdictions around the world support their abolition. Smith, however, believes the process just needs to be more clearly explained.

The Law Commission noted that judges in New Zealand sometimes do explain the peremptory challenge process during jury selection, emphasising that it should not be taken personally. However, this

You should treat it as a matter of when, rather than if, your firm will be hacked

Photo: boonchai wedmakawand / Getty Images

Why cybersecurity is a ‘must’ for law firms

now. The team from ADLS’ Technology and Law committee has put together a simple but effective panel to discuss your fears and options for ways to manage, maintain and take simple, affordable steps now to protect your firm against this ever-increasing risk.

Join us on 14 September Live Stream or In Person and let our experienced panel provide practical guidance on what you can do to bolster your defences in the face of faceless, innumerable and ever-inventive enemies. ■

does not appear to be a mandatory or standardised procedure. The challenge procedure is explained briefly on the MoJ’s website but only in English and not in the jury summons materials.

While Smith’s report, and the changes it recommended, focus primarily on language barriers, the issues deterring and excluding migrants and refugees from sitting on juries run deeper than that.

Current procedures may make jury service seem psychologically intimidating for New Zealanders born overseas, leading them to feel unworthy or unfit to participate as jurors.

These language and psychological barriers make

it less likely that foreign-born jurors can and will participate in jury service, further undermining the jury’s fundamental function of a check on judicial authority that accurately represents broader societal values.

More interpretive support and greater clarification of court procedures would go a long way to make jury service more accessible to migrants and refugees, allowing juries to better represent New Zealand’s increasingly diverse population.

Isaac Lam and Molly So are students at the University of Auckland’s Law School and members of the Equal Justice Project ■ 13

Chancery Chambers office for rent Three office spaces are available in the heritage Chancery Chambers building on the corner of Chancery and O’Connell Streets.

Inspiring excellence in the classroom and on the court.

Open Day 18 September | 10.30am-2.30pm

12.27sqm net located on the fifth floor, internal facing.

■

Learn more

21.16sqm net located on the fifth floor, consisting of two smaller adjoining offices, internal facing.

■

This space could be yours LawNews reaches a discerning audience of nearly 6000 lawyers, judges, politicians and academics every week.

33.71sqm net located on the third floor of the O’Connell Street side of building.

■

Opex includes reception to greet clients/receive couriers, kitchen facilities, copy room access and use of shared meeting rooms.

Please contact Krystal Marshall on (09) 303 5277 or krystal.marshall@adls.org.nz for more information

Get your message in front of them.

Call our advertising executive, Darrell Denney, on 021 936 858 or email Darrell on Darrell.denney@adls.org.nz

Towards Sustainability: The Role of the Law Firm Tuesday 16 November | 4.00pm - 6.15pm A thriving, resilient, safe, and ultimately sustainable world is an enticing prospect. It’s also an imperative. What responsibilities do lawyers and law firms have to help bring about that future?

T 09 303 5278

14

E cpd@adls.org.nz

W adls.org.nz/cpd

Aug 20 2021 Issue 28

SOLICITOR OPPORTUNITIES We have a number of roles available in various locations. These roles range from junior to senior and include partnership opportunities.

Property / Commercial Property Litigation – Construction & Employment Family, Trusts, Wills & Estates Corporate & Commercial Contact Ally or Sarah +64 9 359 9244 or info@legalpersonnel.co.nz

WILL INQUIRIES Please refer to deeds clerk. Please check your records and advise ADLS if you hold a will or testamentary disposition for any of the following people. If you do not reply within three weeks it will be assumed you do not hold or have never held such a document.

LawNEWS: The no-hassle way to source missing wills for $80.50 (GST Included) reception@adls.org.nz

ADLS, PO Box 58, Shortland Street,

DX CP24001, Auckland 1140

Fax: (09) 309 3726

(09) 303 5270

CHOI Bong Lin

MAW Jarvis James

A unique opportunity exists for a qualified professional with partnership aspirations to join our busy team. We are a thriving suburban general practice with a modern approach.

The perfect candidate will be seeking greater autonomy and have proven experience in a range of legal matters including residential property and commercial transactions, relationship property, trusts and estate planning. The successful applicant will receive a competitive remuneration package.

• Late of South Korea • Aged 92 / Died 14’07’21

• Late of 209 Horniblow Road, Matakohe • Married • Farmer • Died 05’07’21

Enquiries will be treated in strict confidence.

Please contact debra@cslegal.co.nz

• Late of 70 King Street, Mangawhai Heads • Single/Divorced • Car Painter • Aged 71 / Died 05’02’21

Solicitor – Partnership Potential West/North-West Auckland

./ i8

R. BRUCE STEWART QC

JORDAN Garry David

JOYCE-MAGGS Matthew Josiah

Having practised as a senior QC in the New Zealand courts, I am now modifying my practice to providing advice and guidance as to litigation strategy.

I will provide advice on what to consider as you navigate the legal system and assist you in determining the best strategic and practical course of action to achieve your desired outcome in the following areas: • • • •

The economics of litigation Strategic decisions for plaintiffs before issuing proceedings Strategic decisions for defendants once proceedings have been issued Strategic decisions for both parties to reach a resolution and the alternative avenues. For example, mediation, arbitration etc.

Please contact me: Email: rbstewart@xtra.co.nz Phone: (09) 3022060 or +64 21 927 553

• Late of 21 Ervine Place, Bucklands Beach, Auckland • Plumber • Aged 24 / Died 19’06’21 LIU Yanchu • Late of Auckland • Aged 63 / Died 04’06’21 MARTINEZ FLORES Jocelyn Policarpio • Late of Auckland • Registered Nurse • Aged 49 / Died 06’08’21

PETERS Sam, aka SALIMI, Aziz • Late of North Shore, formerly of 154 Lake Road, Takapuna, Auckland • Aged 45 / Died 11’06’18 SHAW Diane Elizabeth, aka DODD, Diane Elizabeth, aka COLEY, Diane Elizabeth • Late of 428 Kerikeri Road, Kerikeri • Retired • Aged 68 / Died 09’06’17 WAHAB Abdul • Late of 50/580 Hillsborough Road, Mount Roskill, Auckland • Retired • Aged 83 / Died on or about 26’05’21

15

Bookstore A convenient, one-stop-shop for all your legal resources ADLS members, including student members, receive a 10% discount

Visit the online bookstore:

adls.org.nz/bookstore Phone:

09 303 5270 Email:

thestore@adls.org.nz

The ADLS Bookstore couriers nationwide.

Or, browse in person at: The ADLS Bookstore Ground Floor Chancery Chambers 2 Chancery Street Auckland CBD

Burning Issues Forum 2021 Thursday 23 September | 4.00pm - 6.00pm Presenters: Philip Skelton QC, Bankside Chambers; Mere King, Partner, Buddle Findlay; Liz Coats, Partner, Bell Gully; Shelley Kopu, Lawyer, Shelley Kopu Law; Rosemary Wooders, Senior associate, Bell Gully Chair: Rachael Judge, Senior associate, Simpson Grierson Followed by drinks and nibbles.

T 09 303 5278

16

E cpd@adls.org.nz

W adls.org.nz/cpd