Mr Hart's lawyer and lawyers for the Standards Committee appeared in the High Court at Auckland today (Thurs) to discuss the upcoming disciplinary hearing, which was to take place this month.
Chief High Court Judge Justice Helen Winkelmann said a key witness relied on by the Standards Committee had been a barrister but had recently been appointed a District Court judge.
It is understood the experienced criminal defence lawyer was to give evidence on what would be an acceptable amount to charge a client.
Justice Winkelmann said concerns were raised by Mr Hart's lawyer, John Katz QC, that a District Court judge could make it uncomfortable for members of the Standards Committee panel deciding Mr Hart's case.
She also noted that a previous lawyer for Mr Hart had pulled out of the case, citing the same issue.
"He said he felt he must stand aside from representing Mr Hart because he did not feel it was appropriate to cross-examine a judicial officer in a way that Mr Hart's defence required when he would appear before the same judge as counsel in the foreseeable future."
Justice Winkelmann said the risk of a "chilling factor" could not be ignored.
She said a new expert witness would need to be briefed by the Standards Committee.
It is understood that won't be able to happen by next Monday when the hearing before the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal was set to take place.
Justice Winkelmann also said the disciplinary process had started in 2008 and had been "delayed" by Mr Hart.
"I have asked Mr Katz to express to him the need to fully co-operate."
Mr Hart had previously tried to keep his name secret but lost his bid for name suppression in the Supreme Court this week.
He argued that he had been involved in many high-profile and significant cases and was concerned about the effect publicity would have on his reputation, the people he worked with and his relatives.
He also believed the usual approach to open justice should not apply in his case because no criminal offending was alleged.
However, Chief Justice Dame Sian Elias and Justices Sir Peter Blanchard and Sir William Young rejected that argument.
"The likely particular impact of publicity on that party will always be relevant, but it is untenable to suggest that professional people of high public profile, such as the applicant, have anything approaching a presumptive entitlement to suppression."Mr Hart has represented high-profile killers, including Antonie Dixon, who attacked two women with a samurai sword and shot a man dead in 2003. Another was Joseph Martin Reekers, who later admitted killing Marie Jamieson and dumping her body behind a West Auckland factory.
