Tribunal opts for rehabilitation over a fine, citing self-report and a clean 20-year disciplinary record
A New Zealand lawyer who lied to her employer about needing bereavement leave and then produced a false obituary to support the claim has been censured by the New Zealand Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal.
The tribunal formally rebuked the lawyer in a decision dated 17 September 2026, which set out its reasons for orders made at a penalty hearing on 31 August. She had admitted misconduct in proceedings brought by Auckland Standards Committee 1.
In its written censure, the tribunal told her that "a lawyer's integrity is a precious commodity."
"You briefly slipped below the required standard when you misled your employer about your absence from work," the censure read.
"This censure serves as a permanent reminder on your professional record of that error, which we are confident you will not repeat."
Fabricating the obituary
The misconduct arose after the lawyer lied to her employer about the need for bereavement leave, the tribunal said.
According to the decision, she had just learned that her sister-in-law had died about two years earlier, and that her family, from whom she was estranged, had kept the death from her.
The tribunal said she was "horrified" that her sister-in-law's death had been concealed from her.
"She also felt ashamed to be in such a position, and it was this, and her general state of distress at the news, which prevented her doing what she ought to have, which was to have explained the situation to her employers and asked for some time to process what she had learned," the tribunal said.
When the firm pressed her for more details, she chose to "double down," as her counsel described it, and gave her employers a falsified obituary for her late sister-in-law.
The deception was uncovered with little cross-checking. When confronted, she admitted her fault immediately and resigned from the firm.
She then self-reported to the New Zealand Law Society in February 2025 and sought professional help. The tribunal said it was satisfied her conduct was "quite out of character."
The Standards Committee had sought a modest fine, a censure and the referral of the decision to the Practice Approval Committee if she applies for a practising certificate in future.
The tribunal instead took a more rehabilitative approach. It said "anything less than absolute integrity and honesty in a legal practitioner is unacceptable."
"However, although the Standards Committee refers to repeated acts of dishonesty, the conduct really took place over a very short time frame, and the lie was immediately acknowledged when challenged," it added.
The tribunal also found no aggravating features. In mitigation, it cited her self-report, her remorse and insight and her clean disciplinary record across 20 years of practice. It also noted that "no client was harmed or even indirectly involved in the dishonesty perpetrated."
The tribunal described her as "a practitioner who ought to be encouraged to return to her profession".
The lawyer has not worked since resigning and currently receives a sickness benefit. The tribunal said her conduct deserved denunciation through the censure but did not require "a burdensome financial penalty in order to deter others from similar conduct." It imposed no fine.
The tribunal did order her to pay 75% of the Standards Committee's $8,995 costs, which comes to $6,746.25.
She must also reimburse the New Zealand Law Society for the full tribunal costs of $2,407. The tribunal said there was "no reason why her profession ought to bear the costs of bringing her before the Tribunal." It also granted the committee's request to give a copy of the decision to the Practice Approval Committee.
"We consider that lawyers also need the message that if they engage openly and positively with the various forms of the disciplinary process, that this will be regarded by the Tribunal as demonstrating insight and reliability and is therefore mitigatory," the tribunal said.
