Those actions amount to "negligence or incompetence in her professional capacity ... of such a degree as to reflect on her fitness to practise or as to bring her profession into disrepute", tribunal papers say.
Further, it is alleged that Ms Hall failed to:
* Advise each party of the areas of conflict or potential conflict.
* Advise the purchaser and lender that each should take independent advice.
* Decline to act further for the purchaser or lender where acting would or would likely disadvantage one or both of them.
While the Law Society's standards committee can impose penalties of its own, the tribunal's sanctions for charges bought under the 2006 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act are much harsher and include being struck off the roll, suspension, or fines of up to $30,000.
Last month, Ms Hall sought a tribunal order suppressing her name on the grounds that as a well-known lawyer she would suffer "unfair prejudice, beyond that of any other practitioner charged".
However, tribunal chairman Judge Dale Clarkson said that Ms Hall failed to persuade the tribunal there were grounds for over-riding the presumption of openness or that the expectation for publicity should be displaced in this case.
Ms Hall did not return Herald calls for comment and a tribunal spokeswoman could not say when the matter would be heard.
Associate Professor Bill Hodge of the University of Auckland faculty of law said the charge Ms Hall faced was not common.
Historically, lawyers stealing from trust funds was a more common complaint that resulted in bans.
"I can't recall one [case] that's purely about legal negligence. It's pretty rare, one or two from time to time, but it's certainly not a steady drum beat."
Professor Hodge said he could not comment on Ms Hall's case specifically, but the best legal practice in land transactions was for different lawyers to act for vendors and sellers, in case conflicts arose.
