Christopher Twigley appeal: Ex-lawyer who embezzled from clients asks High Court to overturn banishment

Christopher Twigley's old practice was in Mt Maunganui.

A former Auckland lawyer who turned to embezzlement of client funds and an improper loan when his ambitious “empire building” in Tauranga and Gisborne began to crumble has asked again to be reinstated.

Christopher Manson Twigley, 60, sat in the gallery in the High Court at Auckland today as his lawyer asked Justice Christian Whata to overturn a Lawyers and Conveyances Disciplinary Tribunal decision from July rejecting Twigley’s request to rejoin the legal profession.

Today’s request, however, came with a significant concession: He now agrees he isn’t suited to strike out on his own and operate another trust account. Instead, lawyer Simon Jefferson KC told the judge, he would be content to work as an employee for another lawyer.

Twigley was ousted from the profession in December 2016 after admitting to six misconduct charges. Theft of trust money affected four of his clients and he was found guilty of improperly obtaining a $150,000 loan from a fifth client that was never repaid after Twigley went into bankruptcy. A sixth charge concerned the “irresponsible closure” of his practice.

“The overall picture is of a man desperately fighting to save his practice and his career and in doing so taking a number of shortcuts and steps that were focused more on his financial viability than on the clients’ interests or needs,” the tribunal said in its 2016 decision.

And it’s not evident his mindset has significantly changed since then, the new tribunal decision suggested earlier this year.

“Given that Mr Twigley attributes financial pressures to the errors leading to his past misconduct, there is a serious risk that he will be facing the same financial pressures were he permitted to practise on his own account in the near future,” tribunal chairwoman Dale Clarkson wrote in the July decision.

“We consider that the level of evidence to support the view that Mr Twigley could withstand ethical and financial pressures in future, based on his conduct since his strike-off, is significantly lacking.”

In court today, Twigley’s lawyer said the tribunal was “surprisingly dismissive of Mr Twigley’s unqualified acceptance of his wrongdoing.

“He made a mess of it: Got a bit ambitious, got a bit stretched and then made some terrible calls,” Jefferson conceded. “He didn’t seek to evade the initial findings at all. There was no spin put on them.”

Since being struck off, Twigley has lived in Australia, where he’s had a series of menial jobs but has not accumulated any criminal offending or bankruptcies, Jefferson said.

Paul Collins, counsel for the New Zealand Law Society, noted there were two “significant red flags” raised by the tribunal: Twigley’s tendency to “over-ambition” paired with evidence of what he’s susceptible to when under financial pressure. It also shows a lack of insight, he argued, that Twigley would ever have suggested in the first place - even if his stance has now changed - that he should be able to handle clients’ money again without oversight.

“If he’s not running a practice, if he’s just an employee, what is the risk?” the judge asked. “Redemption is an important principle ... and we just seem to be cutting it off. We seem to be saying, ‘Nah, too bad, no redemption for you.’”

But the judge also noted during the hearing that Twigley “does present a risk” if put in charge of funds again.

“You’d be naive to suggest someone who’s been through this does not present a risk,” he said.

One potential solution, the judge suggested, might be to refer the matter back to the tribunal or have Twigley apply again under the new terms that he serves as an employee instead of a business owner.

Justice Whata reserved his decision.

Twigley’s appeal also seeks to overturn the tribunal’s follow-up decision in September that he should pay a portion of the court costs for the hearing earlier this year.

The costs and expenses for the hearing totalled just under $18,000, the Law Society contended. The tribunal, however, ordered Twigley to instead pay a “modest” $3000, taking into account his financial situation.

Craig Kapitan is an Auckland-based journalist covering courts and justice. He joined the Herald in 2021 and has reported on courts since 2002 in three newsrooms in the US and New Zealand.