Lawyer who attempted to blackmail client’s ex-wife barred from sole practice

The lawyer threatened to file her client's complaint to Immigration NZ if the man's ex-wife didn't settle their divorce. Photo / 123rf

A lawyer who blackmailed a client’s ex-wife during a relationship dispute has been barred from sole practice, with a tribunal finding the new lawyer lacked support from her superiors and was left to “flounder in her ignorance”.

The Auckland-based lawyer, aged in her 40s, had her name permanently suppressed by the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal in a decision released last week. She is referred to as Ms A.

She faced three charges of unsatisfactory conduct, two related to the blackmail attempt and another for breaching exam rules by bringing materials into a closed-book test.

According to the facts, while acting for a man involved in a relationship property dispute in 2020, Ms A went along with her client’s plan to threaten to contact immigration officials.

The client alleged his ex-partner had married him only to secure permanent residency.

Ms A, following her client’s instructions, sent a draft complaint to Immigration New Zealand to the lawyer of his ex-partner in an effort to force a settlement.

“I will suggest your client negotiate with our client to resolve the matter in an amicable way,” the letter read.

“If we do not hear from your client by the end of the week I will have no choice [but] to help our client to prepare an affidavit for the next steps.”

The threat was labelled as blackmail by the tribunal.

At a previous hearing of the tribunal, Ms A admitted her offending and acknowledged it was inappropriate.

The tribunal found that the conduct stemmed from ignorance, and deemed a rehabilitative approach was required.

The decision spoke of how she was a single mother, not originally from New Zealand, and had sent the threat at 1am.

“That she was working at such an hour probably reflects the social and financial pressures she was under,” tribunal deputy chair Dr John Adams wrote in his decision.

Ms A conveyed the threat to the ex-partner’s lawyer seemingly without considering the ethics of the threat, the tribunal found.

Support in her workplace was severely lacking.

“Even when [Ms A’s boss] was copied into correspondence about the dispute between Ms A and the other lawyers (who pointed out that what she was doing infringed the rules) he did not intervene,” the decision said.

The manager of the firm for whom she worked was later fined $4500 for his role in failing to appropriately supervise his employee.

The tribunal ordered Ms A to advise any future employer of her disciplinary history, until October 2024. She was also barred from practising on her own account until the same date.

Ms A had been receiving mentoring from a senior Mandarin-speaking lawyer, which the tribunal ordered should continue over the following 12 months.

The mentor is to advise the tribunal on Ms A’s progress every three months, beginning in July.

The third serious misconduct charge related to Ms A bringing materials into a closed-book exam for lawyers wanting to supervise trust accounts.

The conduct did not amount to cheating and the tribunal ruled it required no additional penalty.