Council Brief - July 2014

COUNCIL BRIEF
Council Brief Advertising
adman@paradise.net.nz
Reynolds Advertising
The monthly newspaper of the
Wellington Branch NZ Law Society
JULY 2014
ISSUE 437
❑ President’s Column
New President looks forward
By Nerissa Barber, President, Wellington Branch, NZLS
“WE shall not cease from exploration,
and the end of all our exploring will be
to arrive where we started and know
the place for the first time.” (T.S. Eliot)
It’s great to be back in the role of
President of the Wellington branch of
the NZLS. After two years away as
Wellington Vice President on the
NZLS Board, I’m hoping that I’ll be able to bring an
additional dimension to serving the Branch and the
profession, with a perspective that’s informed and enhanced by my Board experience. I’m thrilled to be
back – working with everyone, including our fabulous
Branch Manager Catherine Harris, our Vice Presidents
Cathy Rodgers and David Dunbar, and other talented
Wellington Branch Council members and convenors.
Elsewhere on this page we pay tribute to Mark
Wilton’s leadership as Branch President over the last
two years. Mark is now Wellington Vice President on
the NZLS Board, and I’m sure he’ll be continuing to
stay in touch. I also wish to acknowledge the immense
contributions by outgoing Council member Dr Briar
Gordon, who has provided many years of wise counsel
and commitment to our Branch Council; and Debbie
van Zyl who has completed her successful term as
Wairarapa President and will also be much missed
round the Council table.
On Friday 13 June there were two significant events
in our profession. One was the powhiri and swearingin ceremony of Judge Stephanie Edwards in the Wellington District Court. It was a lovely occasion. Two
themes emerged for me. One is the significant charitable work Her Honour has undertaken. (Trade Aid is
among the many good causes she supports. Judge Edwards always ensured women lawyers had a December
Christmas gift shopping night at the Trade Aid shop in
Victoria Street.) It was only at her swearing-in that I
learnt of her famous pineapple and tomato chutneys,
with all proceeds going to good causes. The other
theme was the importance of family in our lives. While
we are very sad Judge Edwards will be leaving Wellington to sit elsewhere, we are delighted to welcome
Her Honour Judge Barbara Morris back to Wellington
from Palmerston North.
The other significant event on 13 June, was the
special sitting in memory of our friends Miriam Menzies and Fiona Butland. I first met Miriam when she
organised the Upper Hutt practitioners annual dinner.
I would also occasionally run into her at Saint Mary of
the Angels in Boulcott Street. Due to her love of
music, particularly the beautifully played organ (by
James Young, and by Gerard McGreevy), Miriam
would make a special trip from the Hutt to inner city
Wellington each Sunday for the full Latin mass. I can
clearly recall Miriam’s eyes lighting up as she listened
to the organ notes wafting through the Church.
Fiona Butland, another talented Upper Hutt practitioner, also left us far too soon. Fiona was highly
regarded within the legal profession, with her clients,
and within the local community.
I would also like to acknowledge the loss of Kathy
Stringfellow, past President of Wellington District
Law Society. The huge numbers at her service testified to the far reaching impact Kathy had on so many
of us, and the contribution she made to the wider
community and to our profession.
As well as dedicated and extremely able law practitioners, we have lost great colleagues and friends.
Our first Council meeting is in July. Over the first
few meetings we will be undertaking strategic planning and refreshing our Wellington Branch Business
Plan. I welcome all comments on what our Wellington
Branch could do more (or less) of, and any other views
you may have. Please do email me at:
wellington.branch.president@lawsociety.org.nz
or phone me at 04 496 6333. For my part, something
I’ve been concerned about for a while is that we in the
Law need to look after each other better – not just in
terms of pastoral support, but also celebrating
achievement. If we don’t do it for ourselves, certainly
no-one else will! I’m sure you’ll be hearing more
about this in future.
I’m sure the next 12 months will be full of challenge and excitement. Let’s get started!
At the Wellington Branch AGM last week, incoming President Nerissa
Barber thanks Mark Wilton who stands down after two years as President.
Change of guard at Branch AGM
MARK Wilton, standing down
after two years as Branch President,
paid tribute to the “vibrant and
engaged membership…” of the
Wellington Branch at last week’
annual general meeting.
He noted the outstanding work
of the Branch committees in “testing and challenging legislative
change…” and praised their contribution to Continuing Professional
Development.
Among other matters, Mr
Wilton noted the significant
progress made on the issue of retention of the intervention rule, the reduction of time and cost resulting
from the move towards electronic
voting, and the Branch’s continu-
ing adherence to its four strategic
pillars: Practising Well, CPD, Collegiality and Communication.
He thanks fellow Council members and Branch Manager Catherine Harris for their support and
dedication.
Incoming President Nerissa Barber said she had enjoyed working
with Mark Wilton since his election
to Council in July 2010. She admired his “can-do” manner, his
sense of judgment, calmness under
pressure and ability to work hard.
“We will miss Mark enormously… I am delighted we will retain
Mark’s expertise in the NZLS Vice
President capacity and will catch up
with him at our Council meetings.”
New Wellington Branch Council
NERISSA BARBER, the only
nominee, was declared elected as
the President of the New Zealand
Law Society Wellington Branch.
Two nominations were received
for two Vice President positions
and David Dunbar and Cathy Rodgers were declared elected.
Twelve nominations were received for 10 positions on the
Council. The successful candidates
are Melanie Baker, Rachael Dewar,
Steph Dyhrberg, Felix Geiringer,
Annette Gray, Aaron Martin, Julius
Maskell, Mary More, Chris
O’Connor and Julia White.
Single nominations were received for Wairarapa, CLANZ and
Young Lawyers representatives;
Victoria Anderson, Sally McKechnie and Richard Evans respectively
were declared elected.
Questions on representative functions and CPD
At the final of the New Zealand Law Foundation–Young Lawyers Committee Mooting Competition held at the Old
High Court recently the respondents’ team of Andrew Pullar and Andy Luck were awarded the winners’ trophy by
presiding judges Hon Justice Dame Susan Glazebrook and Hon Justice Sir William Young. The final was the
culmination of preliminary and semifinal rounds over the preceding six weeks. More pictures and story on page 4.
Art Demystified 3
YLC Mooting 4
Women at Work 5
THE future funding of representative functions of the Society – including
collegiality and CPD – was raised in general business. Chris Corry asked
about NZLS deficits and how long they could continue. NZ Law Society
Executive Director Christine Grice said that the exceptional circumstances
of the global financial crisis and the Christchurch earthquakes had impacted
on finances but deficits for representative services had been less than
budgeted for. She said subscriptions for services would be a barrier and the
Society had to be careful to meet the needs of its members. The level of
satisfaction for its services had increased significantly, she said. In the
medium term no subscription fee was planned for representative services.
Karun Lakshman said the costs of private practice were rising, and that
mandatory CPD added to those costs. “It may become prohibitive for
younger practitioners,” he said. Other members commented that the 10-hour
per year CPD requirement was modest and that there were many affordable
events available. Whether committee meetings – which attracted motivated
members and often dealt with substantial issues – should garner CPD
points was also raised.
Page 2 – COUNCIL BRIEF, JULY 2014
Wellington Branch Diary July
Friday 4 July
Criminal Law Committee
❑ Library News
Useful guides to the libraries
By Robin Anderson Wellington Branch Librarian
Thursday 10 July
Courts and Tribunals Committee
Family Law Committee
Wednesday 16 July
Wellington Branch Council meets
Thursday 17 July
FDR for Mediators, NZLS CLE Webinar, 11am-1pm. 2 CPD Hours
Tuesday 22 July
The Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act – five years in, NZLS CLE Seminar, Terrace
Conference Centre. 1-5pm 3.5 CPD Hours. (Webinar 9.30-11.30am, 2 CPD Hours)
Wednesday 23 July
Influential Presentations, NZLS CLE Workshop, NZICA 9am-1pm.
3.5 CPD Hours
Issues in Unjust Enrichment, NZLS CLE Intensive, Michael Fowler Centre .
5.5 CPD Hours.
THE NZLS website now has a Guide to the
Wellington Library available, which includes links to
floor plans. This is very useful if you have not visited
for a while. Go to: http://www.lawsociety.org.nz/lawlibrary/contact-the-library/wellington/wellingtonhigh-court-library-guide
There is also a guide for the Auckland Library
available – very useful if you have a case in Auckland
and want to familiarise yourself with that library too.
It is at: http://www.lawsociety.org.nz/law-library/
contact-the-library/auckland/auckland-hc-libraryguide
This part of the NZLS website has useful library
information including wifi, photocopying, and all the
information on our services and costs.
Internet
The Australasian Legal Scholarship Library is an
excellent addition to Austlii’s resources that allows
you to search the text of the many Australian and
some NZ legal journals available on the website.
Included as well are collections of judicial and university writings and some full text books. Definitely
worth checking out. Go to: http://www.austlii.edu.au/
au/journals/
New books at NZLS Library Wellington
Friday 25 July
Women in Law Committee
Archbold : criminal pleading, evidence and practice London : Sweet & Maxwell
2014
Fri-Sun 25-27 July
Understanding Mediation – mediation for lawyers Part A, NZLS CLE
Workshop, Amora Hotel.14.5 CPD Hours.
Bennion on statutory interpretation : a code London : LexisNexis 6th ed 2013
Big boss fella all the same judge: a history of the Supreme Court of the Northern
Territory Annondale, NSW: Federation Press 2011
Constitutional and administrative law in New Zealand Wellington : Brookers 4th ed
2014
Dart’s Treatise on the law and practice relating to vendors and purchasers of real
estate London: Stevens 7th ed 1905
Elder law intensive Wellington : New Zealand Law Society 2014
Forsyth’s guide to trusts and estate practice Auckland : CCH New Zealand 7th ed
2014
Mon-Tues 28-29 July
Residential Property Transactions, NZLS CLE Workshop, Terrace Conference
Centre.13 CPD Hours.
Wednesday 30 July
Legal Assistance Committee
Thursday 31 July
Human Rights Committee
Wellington Branch Bar Dinner
Will
Notices
see page 8
in this issue
❑ New books – continued page 4
COUNCIL BRIEF CROSSWORD
PRACTISING WELL
You can use this diagram for either the Quick or Cryptic Clues, but the answers
in each case are different. This month’s solutions are on page 7.
Chaplain, Julia Coleman, 027 285 9115
Cryptic Clues
ACROSS
7. A payment for a coral island (5)
8. Moral consideration of little weight?
(7)
9. Hold in great affection (7)
10. Emblem of the brave (5)
12. They promise good, but bring none
(5,5)
15. Makes a translation the printer set all
wrong (10)
18. Seems to make appearances (5)
19. Not to agree to a full reorganisation
(4,3)
21. He hopes to have a successful run (7)
22. A fascinating creature newly risen (5)
DOWN
1. But she’s unlikely to rush into
marriage! (6,4)
2. It’s charitable to give its benefit (5)
3. Some simple answer as an excuse (4)
4. Value fools to a point (6)
5. A note of whimsy? (8)
6. Grave words (7)
11. Support for a player (5,5)
13. Stopped sorting out re-treads (8)
14. A prize for waste! (7)
16. It helps to keep a roof over one’s head
(6)
17. The directors don’t sound very keen (5)
20. Failed - for want of direction? (4)
Wellington Bar
Dinner – 31 July
Wellesley Boutique Hotel
Quick Clues
ACROSS
7. Sullen (5)
8. Bowers (7)
9. Rich (7)
10. Entice (5)
12. Loud-voiced (10)
15. Arsonist (10)
18. Artless (5)
19. Suffer (7)
21. Spin (7)
22. Short (5)
July 3-5 2014 – 5th LAWASIA Family Law
& Children’s Rights Conference, Sapporo,
Japan. http://lawasia.asn.au
July 18 2014 – Key issues in design of capital
gains tax regimes, University of Auckland.
www.business.auckland.ac.nz
July 24-25 2014 – Symposium on
Implementation of UN Declaration on
Rights of Indigenous Peoples in
Aotearoa, University of Waikato.
www.lawfoundation.org.nz
August 9-11 2014 – Banking and Financial
Services Law Association, 31st Annual
Conference, Queenstown. http://bfsla.org
September 4 2014 – Tax Conference,
Auckland. www.lawyerseducation.co.nz
September 4-6 2014 – 2014 World Bar
Conference, Queenstown. www.nzbar.org.nz
September 8-11 2014 – National Mediation
Conference, Melbourne.
www.mediationconference.com.au
September 11-12 2014 – NZ Insurance Law
Annual Conference, Te Papa, Wellington.
www.nzila.org
September 15-17 2014 – International
Conference on Public Law, Faculty
of Law, University of Cambridge.
www.publiclawconference.law.cam.ac.uk
Sir Owen Woodhouse
– see page 6
Bookings available now
https://bookwhen.com/wellington-branch
Conferences
September 25-27 2014 – Resource
Management Association of NZ
(RMLA), Annual Conference, Dunedin.
www.rmla.org.nz
October 3-6 2014 – 27th Lawasia
Conference, Bangkok. lawasia.asn.au
October 13-14 2014 – Employment Law
Biennial Conference, Auckland. NZLS CLE
Conference.
October 19-24 2014 – IBA Annual
Conference, Tokyo. www.ibanet.org
October 22-24 2014 – The Australian & NZ
Sports Law Associaion (ANZSLA) 24th Annual
Conference, Adelaide. www.anzsla.com.au
October 31 2014 – Women in the Law
Conference 2014, Wellington. NZLS CLE
Conference.
November 14 2014 – NZ Supreme Court: the
first ten years, Auckland Law School.
lawevents@auckland.ac.nz
November 17-18 2014 – Intellectual Property
and Alternative Regimes: is there life outside the
big three? NZ Centre of International Economic
Law. Wellington. anna.burnett@vuw.ac.nz
December 3-5 2014 – Law and Society
Association of Australia & NZ Annual
Conference, Queensland. www.law.uq.edu.au/lsc
DOWN
1. Burden (10)
2. Sham (5)
3. Kind (4)
4. Hurry (6)
5. Slaughterhouse (8)
6. Tumult (7)
11. System of musical
notation (5,3-2)
13. Fondly (8)
14. Attain (7)
16. Hardened (6)
17. Coach (5)
20. Liability (4)
Deadline
August
Council
Brief
Tuesday
22 July
Constitutional
Status Quo
– see page 8
in this issue
MA
DESIGN
m
Answers: See page 7
1
Using four 4s and any mathematical
operation, create 10 separate equations
that equal 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9
respectively; an example of such an
equation that equals 10 is (4 * √4) +
(4†– √4) = (4 * 2) + (4†– 2) = 8 + 2 =
10.
2
It is black’s turn to move. What should
black do?
Law graduate
CV scheme
THE scheme to assist law
graduates into work is still being
operated by the Wellington
Branch.
Law graduates seeking work
leave their CVs at the Society.
These are available to potential
employers needing staff who
can refer to the CVs and choose
appropriate graduates.
The work offered need not be
permanent. Any work in a law
office will give graduates valuable experience that may be
helpful to them next time they
make job applications.
!!!!!!!!"
?^$
>$
=$
<$
;$
:$ Council Brief
9$
Advertising
8$
adman@paradise.net.nz
%@ABCDEFG'
© Mark Gobbi 2013
COUNCIL BRIEF, JULY 2014 – Page 3
ART
Demystifying the art world – making contemporary art accessible
– Join us for an evening at the legendary Peter McLeavey Gallery
By Nerissa Barber
THE Peter McLeavey Gallery has
championed New Zealand art and
artists for over half a century, and
has been instrumental in the
development of art in New Zealand.
The gallery at 147 Cuba Street is
part of Wellington’s social fabric.
Olivia McLeavey, Peter’s
daughter, is now running the gallery. With a keen eye for up-andcoming artists, Olivia is continuing
the traditions of the gallery while
putting her own unique 21st century
stamp on it.
At our special event at the gallery organised by the Women in
Law Committee, two leading New
Zealand artists, Robin White and
Matt Hunt, will talk about their art,
influences, what drives them, and
their views of the art world. Avid
art collector and lawyer Quentin
Hay will share his insights from the
perspective of a collector. Kelly
Carmichael, who has returned to
Wellington’s City Art Gallery from
working at some of the best international dealer galleries overseas,
will talk about her experiences behind the scenes in the art world.
Robin White has challenged
boundaries with national and international recognition. Her work is in
the collection of every important
art institution in the country. She
trained with Colin McCahon, and
has been working since the late
1960s. Her earlier works included
paintings of Sam Hunt, the poet,
and iconic landscapes of the Wel-
lington region. She has worked
across mediums including woodblocks, screen prints, paint, weaving and recently in tapa cloth. As
part of her current practice, Robin
is working with groups of women
from the Pacific Islands utilising
traditional elements in tapa cloth
while conveying emotionally challenging and resonant messages.
Matt Hunt was included in the
Wellington City Art Gallery’s 2010
Ready to Roll exhibition which
drew upon recent, exciting work
being made around the country.
Matt’s vivid images, depicting
apocalyptic visions coupled with
Sci-Fi themes, have become familiar works in the New Zealand painting scene In his work, Matt
responds to contemporary influences with Dante-esque depictions of
heaven and hell. Matt’s works have
been exhibited throughout New
Zealand. He is represented by the
Peter McLeavey Gallery and by the
Ray Hughes Galley in Sydney.
Quentin Hay is a senior commercial lawyer who practises as a
commercial barrister, and was formerly a partner at Bell Gully. His
practice has included a diverse
range of commercial activities,
both international and domestic.
Quentin has a strong and welldeveloped interest in the arts including, in particular, the visual arts
and performance arts. He was, for a
number of years, the co-chair of the
New Zealand Chamber Orchestra.
He is also actively involved in the City Gallery and the Wellington
Museums trust. Quentin and his wife Pip
have put together a significant art collection.
Quentin will share with
us how he started collecting art, what drives
him, what he looks for,
and how to go about
compiling an art collection, along with other
insights from his years
of collecting.
Kelly Carmichael is
the current holder of the
prestigious Rita Angus
Residency, and is curaOlivia McLeavey, seen here with her father Peter, will host the event.
tor, special projects at
the Wellington City Art
Gallery. Previously, she held a cura- overseas, the role of the the art gal- ❑ Event details: Thursday 14
torial internship at the Museum of lery, and the importance of art dealer August, 5.30-7.30 pm, Peter
Contemporary Art in Los Angeles, spaces.
McLeavey Gallery, 147 Cuba St.
has worked in a Parisian dealer galThe Peter McLeavey Gallery will Refreshments from 5.30 pm with
lery, and dabbled in television pro- be showing works by leading New panel discussion from 6pm.
duction as the specialist researcher Zealand photographer Laurence Abfor a six-part documentary series on erhart. There will be an opportunity ❑ Look out in e-brief for
information on how to register
the history of British sculpture. Two to view during the evening.
notable projects were in the cultural
All members of the profession for this special event.
department at the Commonwealth are welcome to attend this event.
Foundation in London, and at the
Sharjah Biennial in the United Arab
Emirates. Her work in the Middle
East has led to a strong interest in
cultural diplomacy. Kelly will talk
The Women-in-Law committee of the Wellington Branch of the NZ Law
about the New Zealand and the InSociety is pleased to announce that the 2014 Shirley Smith Address will
ternational art scene, her experiences
putting together exhibitions here and
be presented by the Honourable Justice Susan Glazebrook DNZM. The
2014 Shirley Smith Address
Defamation and the new media
IT is thought that there will be
three billion internet users by the
end of this year – that’s around
40 percent of the world’s
population with access to the
internet, compared to less than
one percent in 1995.
It is in the light of these somewhat startling statistics that media lawyers Peter McKnight and
Ali Romanos delivered a stimulating seminar last month on
“defamation and the new media”. The seminar was organised by the Independent
Practitioners Committee.
The ability to defame someone has never been easier – on
Twitter or Facebook an injudicious comment can almost instantly reach tens of thousands,
even millions.
“Ultimately, today, everyone
with a keyboard and an internet
connection has the potential to
be a publisher of defamatory
content to mass audiences.”
Ali Romanos covered several
recent cases including Wishart v
Murray and Karam v Parker and
Purkiss illustrative in determining the liability of Facebook
page hosts and administrators
for defamatory content posted
by anonymous third parties. The
title of Justice Glazebrook’s Address is: ‘Protecting the Vulnerable in the
21st Century: An International Perspective’.
The Address will be presented at 5.30pm
on Wednesday 17 September.
Further details will be provided closer to the event. Please mark your
diaries. We look forward to seeing you.
Presenters at the recent Defamation and the New Media seminar,
Ali Romanos (second from left) and Peter NcKnight, flanked by
Wellington barrister Peter Dengate Thrush, executive chairman of
TLDh Top Level Domain Holdings (left), and Chris O’Connor,
convenor of the Independent Practitioners’ Committee.
question of whether mass sites
like Google can be held responsible for objectional material
was also covered. “Editorial
control is key but at what point
does it become unrealistic/impracticable to hold publishers liable?”
Twitter is a trap for the unwary – just ask a politician! The
question of responsibility for
retweets was covered, provoking
a number of comments. Cases
covered included Cairns v Modi
and Lord McAlpine v Bercow.
“Twitter is a potentially dangerous forum for injudicious comments. Consequences can be
severe on the reputation of plaintiff
and bank account of defendant.”
In the second part of the seminar Peter McKnight offered a
couple of highly useful checklists
for advising clients, both plaintiffs and defendants.
As a final proviso for advising
all clients Peter McKnight said
“Be practical: explain to the client
the emotional and monetary costs
of defamation proceedings.”
Lifeline Counselling has a team of qualified professional counsellors
experienced in working with clients across a broad range of issues.
Our high-quality confidential service can help with day-to-day issues such
as: stress, anxiety, burnout, depression, relationship issues, grief, trauma
and addiction.
All our Counsellors are qualified to Masters level and are members of the NZ
Association of Counsellors.
For New Zealand Law Society members and families we are offering a
discounted rate:
$110 based on a normal 60min session
Currently this Face-to-Face service is only available in person in the Auckland
region. Other regions will be introduced in time.
Skype Face-to-Face counselling applies throughout New Zealand.
Please contact Lifeline Counselling on
face2face@lifeline.org.nz or phone 09 909 8750
Page 4 – COUNCIL BRIEF, JULY 2014
YLC MOOTING COMPETITION
Junior Practitioners’ Appellate
Mooting Competition Final
By Monica Hamlyn-Crawshaw, Mooting Competition
Coordinator for the Young Lawyers’ Committee
THE final moot in the 2014 New Zealand
Law Foundation–Young Lawyers’ Committee Mooting Competition was held in
Wellington’s Old High Court on the evening
of Thursday 19 June. The moot was presided
over by the Hon Justice Dame Susan
Glazebrook and the Hon Justice Sir William
Young, both of the Supreme Court.
The moot judgment was superbly authored
by Tim Cochrane (currently a Pegasus Scholar in London) and featured an application for
judicial review of the failure to make a decision made under Electoral Act 1993 relating
to whether particular newspaper content fell
within that Act’s exception for “editorial”
content. Twenty junior lawyers from small
and large Wellington firms, barristers’ chambers, the Crown Law Office, judges’ clerks
and the public sector participated. The competition included preliminary and semi-final
rounds, and culminated in a final between
appellants Jennifer Howes and Anna Whaley
and respondents Andrew Pullar and Andy
Luck. The respondents were announced winners at the ensuing prize-giving function at
Thorndon Chambers and were awarded the
Champions’ Trophy and their own copy of
Willy and Rapley’s Advocacy.
As Law Foundation Chair Andrew Butler
commented at the prize-giving, the Mooting
Competition is a rare and valuable opportunity for junior practitioners to develop their
advocacy skills – whatever their particular
field of practice. Participants attended a training workshop led by experienced New Zealand Bar Association practitioners Matt
Smith and Karen Clark QC. The finalists
were assigned an experienced practitioner as
a mentor to meet with and receive any feedback and discuss queries.
The competition was organised by the
Wellington Branch Young Lawyers’ Committee, who started planning early this year.
The event was generously funded by the New
Zealand Law Foundation and supported by
the New Zealand Bar Association. The Auckland Young Lawyers’ Committee expects to
run a similar competition later this year.
Thanks also to Thorndon Chambers for
generous hospitality, to the High Court and
Supreme Courts for venues and to Lamp Studios Limited and Chris Ryan for photography.
Congratulations to all participants who
have developed legal research and writing
skills through the legal submissions process
and strengthened their advocacy skills, both
in terms of written and oral advocacy in the
court room. Thank you to the volunteer judges, trainers, mentors and registrars.
A copy of the moot judgment is available
from the Mooting Competition 2014 page of
the Wellington Young Lawyers’ website at
www.younglawyers.co.nz
NZ Law Society Wellington Branch President Mark Wilton, NZ Law Foundation Executive
Director Lynda Hagen and Matthew Smith of Thorndon Chambers.
The oung Lawyers’ Committee ellington and the ew ealand ar Association present
Appellant Jennifer Howes addresses the Court.
The New Zealand Law Foundation
Mooting
Competition
2014
MayMay une 2014, ellington
e are grateful to ell ully for their assistance in drafting the competition rules and marking guide.
Liesle Theron of Thorndon Chambers with Hon Justice Dame Susan
Glazebrook and Hon Justice Sir William Young.
❑ New books NZLS Library Wellington –
continued from page 2
Gurry on breach of confidence : the protection of confidential information Oxford :
Oxford University Press 2nd ed 2012
From left: Monica Hamlyn-Crawshaw, Mooting Competition Coordinator from the Young Lawyers
Committee, Anna Whaley, appellant, from Buddle Findlay, Hon Justice Dame Susan Glazebrook, Andrew
Pullar, respondent, Judge’s clerk, Andy Luck from Stout Street Chambers, respondent, Jennifer Howes,
appellant, from Buddle Findlay, Hon Justice Sir William Young and Russell McVeagh partner and chair of the
New Zealand Law Foundation, Andrew Butler.
Join a committee – your
chance to have your say
THE Wellington Branch of the NZ
Law Society has a set of very active
committees which work through
the year to represent the interests of
members and to promote aspects of
the profession.
The new committees for the
coming year are being formed now
– here is your opportunity to become involved. As a voluntary representative body it is important
that as many members as possible
become active in committees so
that the voice of the profession is
heard.
Whether discussing professional
matters, arranging education
forums (particularly important
now with CPD), organising social
functions or influencing the culture
of the profession in various ways,
there are a myriad of topics and
ideas to be canvassed.
It is important for committee
members to note that previous membership is not carried over – committees are dissolved at the end of June;
if you would like to be involved again
please submit your interest.
Present committees are:
Collegiality, Sports & Culture
Criminal Law
Courts and Tribunals (incl ADR)
Employment Law
Ethics
Family Law
Health Law
Human Rights
Immigration and Refugee
Independent Practitioners
Legal Assistance
Library
Parole Law
Public Law
Women in Law
Young Lawyers
A form is available from the Branch: http://my.lawsociety.org.nz/branches/
wellington/documents/Call-for-Committees-2014.docx
Insurance and the law of obligations OUP 2013
International adoption and surrogacy : family formation in the 21st century Wellington : New Zealand Law Society 2014
Judicial review : a New Zealand perspective Wellington : Lexis Nexis NZ 3rd ed 2014
Kerr and Hunter on receivers and administrators London: Sweet & Maxwell 18th ed
2005
Law of mines, quarries and minerals London: Sweet & Maxwell 5th ed 1922
Local authorities law in New Zealand
Wellington : Thomson Reuters 2012 New Zealand Justices handbook
Wellington : Department of Justice 1923
New Zealand justices of the peace and police court practice Wellington: Butterworth
& Co 2nd ed 1953
Police Act review, 2006-2008 : discussion documents and policy papers for the
development of a new Policing Bill Wellington : New Zealand Police 2008
Public benefit in charity law Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press 2013
Salmond on jurisprudence London: Sweet & Maxwell 12th ed 1966
The Native Land Court 1862-1887 : a historical study, cases and commentary
Wellington : Brookers 2013
The principles of equitable remedies : specific performance, injunctions, rectification and equitable damages Sydney : Lawbook Co 9th ed 2014
Time limit on actions, being a treatise on the Statute of Limitations and the e
London: Butterworth 1909
Update on environmental case law Wellington : New Zealand Law Society 2014
Council Brief Advertising
adman@paradise.net.nz
COUNCIL BRIEF, JULY 2014 – Page 5
WOMEN AT WORK
Women at work – strategies for change
Sophie Klinger, Convenor, Women in Law Committee
ON Tuesday 17 June the Women in
Law Committee held an event at
Kensington Swan: “Women at
work: culture change or
revolution?” focusing on practical
strategies for creating change
within the workplace and
overcoming the barriers to
progression and retention of
women. We had an excellent
lineup of panellists, ably chaired by
Committee member Rachael
Dewar: Alastair Carruthers, CEO
of Kensington Swan, Brigid
McArthur, partner at Greenwood
Roche Chisnall, and Ruth Wilkie,
principal policy analyst at the
Ministry of Women’s Affairs.
Here are ten key observations
and messages from our speakers
and audience members:
It’s not all about you – the key
role men in leadership play in recognising and promoting women,
and the importance of involving
men in discussions and events
about women and the workplace.
Research shows that as well as the
individual, the main things that
make a difference in facilitating
women’s success are their immediate team and the wider workplace
culture and policies.
Making the business case –
many of the panellists highlighted
the economic advantages of greater
participation and retention of women in the workplace. Firms doing
this are likely to reap long-term
benefits from holding on to talented, experienced staff, notably happier clients.
A substitute for hard work? –
the value of flexible working for
everyone in the workplace, not just
Amberley James, Georgina Rood and Tess Corbett.
Panel members Ruth Wilkie from the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, Alastair
Carruthers, CEO Kensington Swan, and Brigid MacArthur, partner at
Greenwood Roche Chisnall, are flanked by Sophie Klinger (left) and
Rachael Dewar (right) from the Women in Law Committee.
women with childcare commitments – and ensuring that flexible
and part-time workers were not
marginalised. Other key issues
were hourly vs alternative billing
and managing clients’ expectations
about timeframes and staff availability.
Tipping points – around 25-30
percent women’s participation in
senior roles was perceived to be a
tipping point for helping workplace
culture to self-correct.
Unconscious bias – the need to
understand, identify and counter
unconscious biases against women
that can devalue women’s contributions.
Risky business – the importance
of promoting yourself and taking
risks – but the limitations of this as
well, since women tend to be undervalued for their potential compared with men and may encounter
negative stereotypes in attempting
to put themselves forward (refer
previous item).
Visible culture leaders – buyin, self-awareness and modelling
from those at the top was crucial.
Mentors and sponsors – several participants also talked about
women or men that had recognised
their ability, provided opportunities
and assisted in their career development, often on an informal basis.
Grass isn’t necessarily greener?
– law is a high pressure profession
across the board with in-house and
public sector lawyers experiencing
many of the same workplace issues
as those in private firms.
Playing the long game – remembering that many people are
now retiring later and having longer
careers, so it’s okay to take an indirect path and career breaks.
On behalf of the Committee, I
would like to say a huge thank you to
all the panellists and attendees for
contributing to such an interesting
and thought-provoking event. We
hope it was useful and everyone took
something away. We will continue to
think of ways to work on the issues
raised, and will also look at strategies
for increasing men’s participation at
our events in the future.
Also, very grateful thanks to Kensington Swan for hosting the event.
Althea Carbon and Rebekah Dixon.
Emma Gabor, Jenny Beale and Michelle Williams.
Immigration Lawyers committee dinner
By Mark Wilton
IT was a great privilege to be invited by our Immigration Lawyers Committee to attend their dinner/
meeting with the Minister of Immigration the Honourable Michael Woodhouse at the Wellington Club on
Monday 16 June.
The Committee is very fortunate that traditionally the Minister attends a dinner with the Committee
every year. Whilst this is not at an area of law I am familiar with in my own daily practice I was impressed
with the exchange and dialogue between our Committee and the Minister on thorny and complex issues in
this area of law. The open engagement provided an excellent opportunity for members to express their
views and hear those of the Minister.
I thank and congratulate the Convenor of the Committee, Kamil Lakshman, for her sterling work in
organising this year’s dinner and also take this opportunity to thank the Minister for his time in making
himself available to meet with our Committee.
Those who attended the recent Immigration and Refugee Committee dinner were (left to right): Fraser Richards
– Senior Solicitor MBIE, Christopher Tennet, Tim Carter, Richard Small, Bevan O’Connor, John Petris, Minister
of Immigration Hon Michael Woodhouse, Mark Wilton – President of Wellington Branch NZLS, Mahi Tangaere,
Joanne Cottrell, Kamil Lakshman – Committee Convenor, Rowland Woods, Inns Zadorozhnaya.
Ella Tait and Jean Cordue.
Page 6 – COUNCIL BRIEF, JULY 2014
SIR OWEN WOODHOUSE
Getting to grips with the architect of ACC
By Rod Vaughan
THE voice on the phone was crisp
and courteous. “Yes, of course you
can come and see me. I don’t know
whether I can say much but I’ll tell
you as much as I can.”
Sir Owen Woodhouse was not
known for giving media interviews
and his words took me completely
by surprise, especially as the subject matter was politically charged.
Never in my wildest dreams did I
expect him to open up to a complete
stranger about the ongoing travails
of ACC, so I quickly agreed to meet
him the next day. That was less than
two years ago and would prove to
be the last interview he ever gave.
He greeted me warmly at the
door of his Remuera house where
he lived alone at the ripe old age of
95, but I sensed something was
troubling him.
“Come in, come in,” he said,
ushering me to an upstairs living
room that was lined with memorabilia going back many, many years.
As we took our seats my heart sank
when he fixed me with his kindly
but steely eyes: “Look, I’m sorry
about this but I’ve had a change of
heart. In the circumstances I really
don’t think I should be talking to
you.”
What happened next is not
something that I’m particularly
proud of. With much bluster and
bravado I concocted a number of
“compelling” reasons why it was
imperative that we should talk, never expecting that he would wilt. But
after much “to-ing and fro-ing” he
did, and so began one of the most
engaging encounters that I’ve had
in 45 years of journalism.
From the outset it became rapidly apparent that one of New Zealand’s greatest jurists had lost none
of the intellect and critical faculties
that had taken him to the top of his
profession. The discussion we had
that day formed the basis of an article which first appeared in the National Business Review on 25 June
2012.Excerpts from that article are
reproduced below with permission.
ACC architect Sir Owen
Woodhouse lays it on the line
If ACC architect Sir Owen
Woodhouse is disappointed the
government has abandoned plans to
revert to his pay-as-you-go ACC
model and stick with the fully funded system, he’s not showing it.
For a man who has presided over
countless courtroom battles he
gives the impression he sees it as a
small glitch on the path to vindication.
Back in 1967 the former president of the Court of Appeal chaired
a Royal Commission into Accident
Compensation which led to the
creation of New Zealand’s much
acclaimed no-fault accident compensation scheme.
It was funded on a pay-as-you-go
basis just like health, education and
other social services. But in 1998
the National government changed it
to a fully funded insurance scheme,
setting levies in each year to cover
the whole future cost of accidents
which occurred in that year.
“ACC suddenly became far more
expensive when it became a funded
system and that was a grave mistake,” the sprightly 95-year-old
says.
“Immediately the cost advantage
and accuracy of a pay-as-you-go
welfare based system disappeared
and every year since then both employers and all owners of vehicles
have been required to pay much
larger sums than are necessary.”
Sir Owen chooses his words
carefully, all too aware ACC is a hot
political potato which has cost
many people in high places their
jobs and reputations over the years.
His advice to those who want to
revamp ACC is very simple. “When
you are peering into the future it is
not at all a bad idea to remember
where you have been.
“The social responsibilities
which underpin ACC ought never
to be tested by clever equations, or
brushed to one side by economic
dogma.
“In the end, they depend on decent fellow feeling and the ideas
and ideals that support it.”
Such was the regard that his original scheme was held in that the
Australian Prime Minister at the
time, Gough Whitlam, asked him to
come up with something similar for
Australia. He duly produced a blueprint for an accident compensation
scheme which also incorporated
sickness incapacity. Mr Whitlam
was mightily impressed, with the
result that the two became close
friends.
Despite being five years short of
becoming a centenarian, he still
lives by himself, surrounded by the
memorabilia of a very full and active life.
By today’s standards he is “old
school”, polite and courteous to a
fault, even serving coffee and cake
to this reporter from a tray that he
carried into the living room.
Getting him to talk about himself
is no mean feat as he is a modest
man who is clearly uncomfortable
at saying anything that might be
construed as self-serving.
He even drew the line at having
his photograph taken alongside a
painting of the naval vessel he
served on during World War II.
Council Brief Advertising
adman@paradise.net.nz
It was while serving as a lieutenant commander on active operations
in the Adriatic that he won the Distinguished Service Cross for gallantry, later working as a liaison
officer with the Yugoslav partisans.
After the war he returned home
and practised law before being appointed a judge of the former Supreme Court (now High Court) in
1961 and going on to become president of the Court of Appeal from
1981 to 1986.
He later became president of the
Law Commission and a Privy
Councillor and member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
By any standards it was a stellar
judicial career marked by his worldleading reforms of accident compensation and ground breaking
work to even up the division of matrimonial property, something that
was influenced by his “rather wonderful wife”.
During his time as president of
the Court of Appeal he became involved in the Air New Zealand Erebus disaster, presiding over a
judicial review of certain findings
in the controversial Mahon report.
Today, Sir Owen is reticent
about discussing the case, not wishing to cause distress to the widows
and families of the late Justice Mahon and Jim Collins, the captain of
the doomed airliner.
But he stands by his findings and
his firm belief that the Chippindale
report into the accident, which
largely put it down to pilot error, got
it right. “There was a chain of unfortunate events which contributed
to the disaster but the ultimate cause
was the captain’s decision to descend below 16,000 feet when there
were written instructions, actually
carried in the flight deck, prohibiting this.”
As with almost everything he
says Sir Owen delivers these words
with the gravitas of the Bench, his
eyes locked on his audience daring
them to avoid his gaze, but it’s not
done in an intimidatory or hostile
way.
It is the pose of a man speaking
with the authority and conviction of
someone who knows his subject inside out and does not wish to be
trifled with.
But sometimes appearances can
be deceptive and there is, by his
own admission, a sentimental and
deeply caring side to the man when
it comes to the welfare of his fellow
human beings.
If there’s one thing lacking in society and the law today, he says, it is
mercy. “When the monarch takes
the various oaths at his or her coronation they say ‘in mercy I will do
these things’.
“To me, that means the society
we live in ought to make its decisions in a just, balanced and merciful way, especially as far as the law
is concerned.
“I think any judge should be left
with some kind of discretion to exercise mercy, but we’re getting to
the stage where no judge would be
prepared to do this because it would
probably be overruled in the Court
of Appeal.
“Why should we feel it necessary
to have sentencing put into a moral
straightjacket?”
To illustrate his point, Sir Owen
recounted the story of an offender
who contacted him some years after
appearing before him in the High
Court. “I got a telephone call from
the man who said, ‘you won’t remember me, but I did something
wrong and they told me I would be
going to prison for two years. To
my amazement, you discharged me
without conviction and ordered me
to pay $2000 towards the cost of the
prosecution’ .”
The man then explained that as a
result of this he had turned his life
around and now held a position of
great trust and responsibility.
It is a story which still resonates
with Sir Owen all these years later.
“To salvage a life like that is pretty
important, isn’t it?” he says. “It
makes you feel quite good when
that happens.”
In most respects, the eminent jurist is more than satisfied with the
administration and application of
law in this country and believes the
newly created Supreme Court is a
success. “It takes a while for this
kind of change to settle down but I
think on the whole those who have
been appointed to the Supreme
Court have done well.
“I was told by Lord Diplock
when I was sitting beside him in the
Privy Council that he thought that
little New Zealand had a particularly strong appellate court. “In fact,
he said he didn’t think it was outdone by any of the others in the
Commonwealth so I have no doubt
we have the right people now to do
this.”
Sir Owen also believes it is probably inevitable New Zealand will
eventually become a republic, although it is not something he personally favours. “I know that in
some ways it sounds a bit absurd to
have a head of state on the other
side of the world. But for myself, I
think the present system is a pretty
efficient and sensible one that
doesn’t cost us anything.
“To put a different one in place
is going to be very awkward.
“How are you going to appoint
that person? Is it going to be done
the way it is at the moment by the
people who happen to be in government or should there be an election
of the president of the country?
“Yes, I know what we have now
is absurd in some ways, but for me
I’d rather leave sleeping dogs lie.”
And on that note, it was time to
take leave of Sir Owen Woodhouse,
ONZ, KBE, KB, DSC - but not before he pressed a very fine bottle of
shiraz into my hand. “I know you
will be cross with me for giving you
this, but please accept it,” he said,
locking me once again in his sights.
Accepting gifts is a cardinal sin
according to the journalists’ training manual. But it offers no advice
on what to do when they are offered
by of one of New Zealand’s most
distinguished High Court judges.
After all, their word is sacrosanct, be it in the courtroom or their
place of abode, and I had no option
but to thank him profusely and disappear down the street, bottle in
hand.
The full version of this story by
Rod Vaughan, entitled “ACC architect Sir Owen Woodhouse lays it on
the line”, appeared in the National
Business Review on 25 June 2012.
❑ This article first appeared in Law
News Issue 12 (2 May 2014),
published by Auckland District Law
Society Inc.
shelagh.murray@vuw.ac.nz
COUNCIL BRIEF, JULY 2014 – Page 7
COMMUNITY LAW CENTRE
Misgendering our transgender people
By Kate Scarlet, Community Lawyer
A transgender person is someone
whose gender identity or
expression is different from their
physical sex at birth. Transgender
people experience a number of
unique legal issues which often
arise from society’s discrimination
against them and the failure of the
law to provide for them in day-today issues. One of the more
common legal issues a transgender
person might regularly face is
misgendering by government
departments
and
private
organisations. I will discuss why
this is an issue, what the legal
position is in New Zealand, where
people go wrong and how we can
support our transgender clients.
Why is misgendering an issue?
Misgendering is when people or
organisations get the gender of a
person wrong and, in most cases
where legal issues arise, refuse to
correct their mistake when asked.
Misgendering someone is disrespectful and can be dangerous. For
example, a letter which misstates a
MA
transgendered person’s title may
result in them being “outed” to their
house mates, neighbours or friends
and to fear for their personal safety
or expose them to violence. Incorrect records may also “out” transpeople to teachers, employers or
other organisations they are involved with which may expose
them to further discrimination. In
addition, there is the psychological
harm which stems from consistently being referred to by an incorrect
title or as the wrong gender. Finally, misgendering may have an effect on services provided if they are
provided differently on the basis of
gender.
The legal position in New
Zealand
New Zealand statutes do not
have a specific definition of gender,
despite several references to gender
and sex. The closest we come to a
definition of sex is in the Human
Rights Act 1993 (HRA) where the
definition is: ‘[s]ex which includes
pregnancy and childbirth’.1
DESIGN
m
Answers for puzzles from page 2
1
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
Some solutions follow (others exist):
(4 – 4) + (4 – 4) = 0 + 0 = 0
(4 + 4) ÷ (4 + 4) = 8 ÷ 8 = 1
(4 – 4) + (4 ÷ 34) = 0 + (4 ÷ 2) = 0 + 2 = 2
(4 ÷ 4) + (4 ÷ 34) = 1 + (4 ÷ 2) = 1 + 2 = 3
(4 ÷ 34) + (4 ÷ 34) = (4 ÷ 2) + (4 ÷ 2) = 2 + 2 = 4
(34 + 34) + (4 ÷ 4) = (2 + 2) + 1 = 4 + 1 = 5
[(4 + 4) ÷ 4] + 4 = (8 ÷ 4) + 4 = 2 + 4 = 6
(4 * 34) – (4 ÷ 4) = (4 * 2) – 1 = 8 – 1 = 7
[(4 * 4) ÷ 4] + 4 = [16 ÷ 4] + 4 = 4 + 4 = 8
(4 ÷ 4) + (4 * 34) = 1 + (4 * 2) = 1 + 8 = 92
2
1…Qe4+ 2 Kg3 Qg4+ 3 Kh2 Rxh4# (Blechschmidt v Flohr Zwickau 1930)
COUNCIL BRIEF
The monthly newspaper of the
Wellington Branch NZ Law Society
Advertising Rates: casual or contract rates on application. Telephone Robin
Reynolds, Reynolds Advertising, Kapiti Coast (04) 902 5544, e-mail:
adman@paradise.net.nz. Rates quoted exclude GST.
Advertising Deadline: for the August 2014 issue is Wednesday 23 July, 2014.
Circulation: 3150 copies every month except January. Goes to all barristers and
solicitors in the Wellington, Marlborough, Wairarapa, and Manawatu areas. Also
goes to many New Zealand law firms, to law societies, universities, judicial officers,
and others involved in the administration of justice.
Will Notices: $57.50 GST inclusive for each insertion.
Subscriptions: Annual subscription $60.00 incl. GST. Extra copies $5.00 each.
Subscription orders and inquiries to: The Branch Manager, New Zealand Law Society
Wellington Branch, P.O. Box 494, Wellington.
Editor: Chris Ryan, telephone 472 7837, (06) 378 7431 or 027 255 4027
E-mail: chrisr@wise.net.nz
Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the NZ Law Society Wellington Branch or the Editor.
Council Brief is published for the NZ Law Society Wellington Branch
by Chris Ryan, and printed by APN Print, Wanganui.
In 2006, responding to Georgina
Beyer’s Human Rights (Gender
Identity) Amendment Bill, the Solicitor-General released an opinion
that the definition of ‘sex’ in the
HRA already provided transgender
people with protection from discrimination.2 As such, the Bill was
withdrawn. After this opinion, the
Human Rights Commission (HRC)
confirmed they would be accepting
complaints regarding discrimination faced by transgender people.
While one complaint has been published in the HRC’s case studies
publication Te Rito, no complaints
regarding discrimination on the basis of gender identity have yet
reached the Human Rights Review
Tribunal.
In April of this year, Louisa Wall
introduced a supplementary order
paper (number 432) which, if
adopted, would include transgender
in this definition. This paper seeks
to entrench and bring the law in line
with current practice. If Louisa
Wall’s supplementary order paper
is accepted, it will provide clarity
and certainty regarding the protection the HRA offers transgender
people, rather than relying on exjudicial guidance from the Solicitor-General.
Where people go wrong
Many organisations require a
transgender person to provide a
birth certificate as proof of their
gender, wrongly believing that this
is the definitive proof, despite
section 33 of the Births, Deaths,
Marriages and Relationships Registration Act 1995.3 This belief probably arises from the fact the birth
certificate is the only type of identification that has a statutory process
to change gender. The other most
Crossword Solutions
From page 2
Cryptic Solutions
Across: 7 Atoll; 8 Scruple; 9 Embrace; 10 Totem;
12 False hopes; 15 Interprets; 18 Looks; 19 Fall out;
21 Athlete; 22 Siren.
Down: 1 Career girl; 2 Doubt; 3 Plea; 4 Assess; 5
Crotchet; 6 Epitaph; 11 Music stand; 13 Arrested;
14 Atrophy; 16 Rafter; 17 Board; 20 Lost.
Quick Solutions
commonly accepted types of identification (drivers licence and passports) both allow gender to be
changed by completing a statutory
declaration.
Requiring transgender people to
provide birth certificates creates an
addition barrier for gender recognition because of the court process
associated with the birth certificate.
From a practical perspective, attending court can be a difficult step
for many people, not to mention the
cost of lawyers’ fees and expert
witness fees often required in such
proceedings. From a legal perspective, there is a medical standard that
many transgender people cannot afford to pursue or choose not to for
personal reasons, but who still wish
to have their gender recognised.
Misgendering – a legal issue
Under the Privacy Act 1993, all
people have the right to correct information held about themselves by
an organisation or to attach their
version of the facts. Where discrimination comes into play is the level
of proof transgender people are required to provide to prove their
gender compared to cisgender people (a cisgender person is someone
whose gender identity is the same
as their physical sex at birth).
If a company requires proof of
identity and asks its clients to provide either a birth certificate, passport or drivers licence, when a
transgender person requests to
change their gender in the company’s records, they cannot be required to provide their birth
certificate exclusively. To give
transgender people more limited
options is discrimination.
Practical approaches
A lot of organisations are not
aware of the law protecting transgender people, nor their obligations
under it. In addition, a lot of people
are unaware of the harm their policies are causing. Often enough,
simply clarifying an organisation’s
obligations and explaining the human cost of their policies will be
enough to prompt a change of their
policies of their own accord. Where
this is not possible, as discussed
above, the HRC will accept complaints on the grounds of discrimination on the basis of gender
identity.
Our clients
Taking action against misgendering doesn’t often result in large
settlements, but can provide a lot of
emotional satisfaction for clients
and help them with practical issues
most of us never experience as our
gender identity is seldom questioned.
If you are unsure how to engage
with your transgender clients, there
are some useful resources on the
HRC website: www.hrc.co.nz.
Some things Community Law has
done to help welcome our transgender clients include providing a
space for personal pronouns on our
forms, posters and pamphlets that
are transgender inclusive and training our staff and some volunteers
(provided by the Queer Straight Alliance Network Aotearoa) in how
to be queer and transgender friendly.
If you have further questions
feel free to contact me through
Community Law – (04) 568 8964.
Footnotes
1
Human Rights Act 1993,
s21(1)(a)
2
Solicitor-General Human Rights
(Gender Identity) Amendment
Bill (Ref ATT395/9, 2006)
3
Births, Deaths, Marriages and
Relationships Registration Act
1995, s33
Useful resources:
Human Rights Commission – www.hrc.co.nz
Transgender People at Work – http://www.dol.govt.nz/er/minimumrights/
transgender/Transgenderpeople.pdf
Useful resources around Wellington region – “http://blog.megan.geek.nz/
new-zealand-transgender-resources/
Queer Straight Alliance Network Aotearoa – www.qsanetwork.org.nz
Across: 7 Moody; 8 Arbours; 9 Opulent; 10 Tempt;
12 Stentorian; 15 Incendiary; 18 Naive; 19 Undergo;
21 Revolve; 22 Brief.
Down: 1 Imposition; 2 Bogus; 3 Type; 4 Hasten; 5
Abattoir; 6 Turmoil; 11 Tonic sol-fa; 13 Tenderly;
14 Achieve; 16 Inured; 17 Train; 20 Debt.
THE WIZARD OF ID
Council Brief Advertising
adman@paradise.net.nz
Page 8 – COUNCIL BRIEF, JULY 2014
PROFESSIONAL OFFICES
ROOM AVAILABLE
WILL
Masterton lawyer’s long walk
for pleasure and purpose
ENQUIRIES
By Piers Fuller
Featherston Chambers has a room available for a barrister, who would
join an established central Wellington chambers of four barristers, in an
elegant, professional and collegial environment in the upper floor of the
historic Bennett house in Hawkestone St, close to the courts.
Facilities include website (http://featherstonchambers.co.nz), library,
boardroom, broadband, high speed photocopier/scanner, kitchen,
shower, offstreet parking.
Please email featherston.chambers@clear.net.nz
Stuck in a constitutional
status quo
By Dr Stephen Winter, Chair, Auckland Branch of the
New Zealand Society for Legal and Social Philosophy
NEW Zealand has a proud history
of constitutional innovation and it
is far from clear that its current
“unwritten” constitution is fit for
present purposes. Nevertheless,
New Zealand’s Constitutional
Review has limped to an end and
its Constitutional Advisory Panel’s
Report appears designed for a
bottom shelf in the Parliamentary
library. What went wrong?
Professor Bradford Morse, Dean
of Te Piringa Faculty of Law, believes the Report’s failings are the
result of a flawed process.
In a New Zealand Society for
Legal and Social Philosophy talk
given recently, Professor Morse
critiqued the Review and suggested
some issues New Zealand should
consider in any future discussions.
The Review originated in the
Maori Party’s 2008 support agreement with the National Party. Professor Morse drew attention to the
point that the Review did not respond to broad public concerns and
its expedient origins coloured its
subsequent work. Without a remit
to investigate matters of public
concern, the Panel was charged
with promoting a “constitutional
conversation”. However, the Panel
did not engage with the media effectively and failed to capture public attention.
The resultant Report reflects the
Panel’s “woolly” remit. The Report
does not provide concrete recommendations apart from the easily
agreed (and easily ignored) requests that the conversation continue and for more civic education.
On key issues, including the
Parliamentary term and the position of the Treaty of Waitangi and
the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act,
the report merely recommends that
there be processes for further discussion. On other matters, such as a
written constitution, the Report
recommends, in a Janus-faced
manner, both that the constitution
remain “unwritten” and suggests
its consolidation into a single act
with (unspecified) portions entrenched.
Professor Morse argued that
both the Review and the Report
would have been improved by incorporating matters of immediate
personal relevance, such as the environment, health care and housing.
It has become common for constitutions to reflect such concerns.
For example, section 73 of the
Ecuadorian Constitution obligates
the state to prevent “activities that
lead to the extinction of species,
[and] the destruction of ecosystems
…”. Turning to health care, Professor Morse pointed out that 67.5 percent of national constitutions
include a provision for health care
and 38.1 percent of those impose
health care obligations upon the
state.
Finally, in terms of housing, the
South African constitution stipulates that “Everyone has the right to
have access to adequate housing”.
The environment, health care,
and housing are examples of topics
of material interest to a broad majority of New Zealanders.
Professor Morse argued that,
had the Panel made such considerations public, then, not only would
the “constitutional conversation”
been more vigorous, the resulting
public attention could have helped
shape a report that was not only
better, but one that would be seen as
having engaged in a process sufficiently legitimate so as to enable
the Panel to make more concrete
recommendations.
As the subsequent question period emphasised, constitutional
change tends to emerge from processes that engage with matters of
widespread dissatisfaction, through
mechanisms that maximise public
attention, input and accountability.
The New Zealand Society for Legal
and Social Philosophy hosts regular meetings in both Auckland and
Wellington. For details of our activities, please visit our website at:
http://nzlsp.wordpress.com/
❑ This article first appeared in Law
News Issue 13 (9 May 2014), published
by Auckland District Law Society Inc.
Deadline August Council Brief
Tuesday 22 July
A Masterton lawyer recently
walked one of New Zealand’s epic
tracks and raised $5,000 for a little
boy with muscular dystrophy.
Julie Millar tramped 1300kms
down the spine of the South Island,
a feat that sadly Quinn Lyford will
never be able to manage due the
progressively debilitating nature of
his condition – a fact that hit home
as Millar was taking on the gruelling final leg toward Bluff.
Quinn suffers from the genetic
disease Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy and he will require all sorts
of support as the disease progresses, so the fundraising was a welcome boost for him and his family.
An avid tramper, Millar took almost three months out from work
as Associate at Logan Gold Walsh
to complete the South Island section of Te Araroa, setting out shortly after Christmas. Dubbed the
greatest New Zealand adventure
there is, Te Araroa is New Zealand’s trail, a continuous 3,000km
walking track stretching from Cape
Reinga in the North of New Zealand to Bluff in the South. It was
officially opened in 2011.
Millar says she feels fortunate to
have had the opportunity to do the
walk and because the tramp was
meticulously planned and broken
down into segments, the task never
seemed overwhelming.
“You don’t really think about
the totality of the whole thing until
you are finished. You just do bit by
bit and eventually you get to the
end – it’s not too tricky.”
Masterton Rotary Club, of
which Millar is a member, has supported the trip and contributed to
the fundraising. Some Rotary members even joined her on sections of
the tramp.
Millar didn’t enter into the journey cold. She went for three hard
weekend tramps in the Tararuas
leading up to the start of her Te
Araroa trek which stood her in good
stead. It still took her a week or so
on Te Araroa to get “trail fit” and
feel settled into her rhythm.
Though she feels a sense of accomplishment at having walked the
length of the South Island, she also
keeps it in perspective.
“There were people I met who
were doing the whole of New Zealand and I thought I was a bit wussy
compared to them,” she says.
Julie wrote a blog updating her
progress and regular snippets appeared in Wairarapa News.
FOR URGENT ACTION
Please contact the solicitors
concerned if you are holding a will
for any of the following:
CHRISTIAN, Desmond Earl
Formerly of 8 Nassau Avenue,
Grenada North, Wellington.
Carpenter.
Died on 18 March 2014.
Harrison Byrne (Kathleen Byrne)
PO Box 50179, Porirua City 5240
Tel 04 237 5421 Fax 04 237 5496
office@harrisonbyrnelaw.co.nz
PRIOR, Michael John
Of Village At The Park, 130 Rintoul
Street, Newtown, Wellington.
Died on 19 April 2014.
Duncan Cotterill (Kim Schouten)
PO Box 10376, The Terrace,
Wellington 6143
Tel 04 471 9448 Fax 04 499 3308
kim.schouten@duncancotterill.co.nz
“I was really pleased that I was
able to have that time and as a spinoff from that was able to get some
money in for Quinn,” she says.
Julie hopes her walk has helped
raise awareness of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy and that the money will assist Quinn’s family with
the challenges they face in the future. People with congenital diseases are discriminated against in that
they do not receive the same level
of assistance as those with disabilities covered by ACC. This means it
places more financial burden on the
families to pay for necessary equipment, house alterations and assistance as the disease progresses.
The Lyford family is investigating innovative medical treatment
overseas that may delay the usual
progression of Muscular Dystrophy.
❑ This article first appeared in Wairarapa
News 4 June 2014), and is republished
with permission.
Demystifying the art world – making
contemporary art accessible
An evening at the Peter McLeavey Gallery
presented by the Women in Law Committee
Hear the perspectives of prominent artists
TE MOTU, Maiti Ann
Of Tio Tio Road, Seatoun, Wellington.
Died on 30 May 2014.
Tripe Matthews Feist
(Peter McMenamin)
PO Box 5003, Wellington
Tel 04 472 5079 Fax 04 473 3696
peter@tmf.co.nz
■
■
The cost of a will notices is $57.50 (GST
inclusive). Please send payment with your
notice.
Will notices should be sent to the Branch
Manager, NZ Law Society Wellington
Branch, PO Box 494, Wellington.
Hold the
date!!
The Wellington Bar Dinner
is to be held on
Thursday 31 July.
The venue is the refurbished
Wellesley Boutique Hotel
The guest speaker will be Hon
Chris Finlayson,
Attorney-General
The cost of the event is $120
Online booking now
available at
https://bookwhen.com/
wellington-branch
Robin White and Matt Hunt, collector
Quentin Hay and Wellington City Art Gallery
curator of special projects Kelly Carmichael.
Thursday 14 August at 6.30pm
Peter McLeavey Gallery
147 Cuba Street, Wellington
All members of the profession are welcome to attend
See story on page 3 in this issue
Council
Brief
Advertising
adman@paradise.net.nz