Hart v The Standards Committee

Civil procedure

Hart v The Standards Committee (No 1) of the New Zealand Law Society – 13 February 2012 – SC [2012] NZSC 4 – Elias CJ, Blanchard, and William Young JJ

Unsuccessful application for leave to appeal to SC from decision of CA – CA had dismissed an appeal against HC decision refusing applicant name suppression – applicant faced charges (not involving criminal conduct) which were to be dealt with by the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal – primary basis for proposed appeal was contention that the usual open justice approach, adopted in cases such as R v Liddell, should not apply to a professional person with a high public profile facing disciplinary charges, particularly where criminal offending was not alleged – HELD: a Tribunal or Judge, deciding whether to order suppression, was exercising a discretion which, in a disciplinary context, must allow for any relevant statutory provisions, as well as the more general need to strike a balance between open justice considerations and the interests of the party who sought suppression – likely particular impact of publicity on that party would always be relevant, but it was untenable to suggest that professional people of high public profile had anything approaching a presumptive entitlement to suppression – no arguable error in approach taken in CA – application for leave to appeal dismissed

 This headnote has been sourced from the LINX database – the foremost guide
 to New Zealand caselaw and legal writing for the last 20 years, created by the 
 New Zealand Law Society library for lawyers.