At The Bar - August 2023

NZBA e-Library

Powered by Lexis Advance

When racing against time, you need technology by your side.

Your reputation as a barrister stands on the strength of your advice. LexisNexis® provides the right research and practical guidance tools to help you offer better analysis, answer client questions, and improve your bottom line. NZBA e-library is a selection of exclusive commentary and insights, forms, precedents, and practical content including:

Your reputation as a barrister stands on the strength of your advice. LexisNexis® provides the right research and practical guidance tools to help you offer better analysis, answer client questions, and improve your bottom line. NZBA e-library is a selection of exclusive commentary and insights, forms, precedents, and practical content including:

Sims Court Practice

Sims Court Practice

New Zealand Law Reports

New Zealand Law Reports

New Zealand Unreported judgements

New Zealand Unreported judgements

Laws of New Zealand, NZ Legislation Suite Cross on Evidence and

a range of international content including:

a range of international content including:

Australia Law Reports

Laws of New Zealand, NZ Legislation Suite Cross on Evidence and Australia Law Reports

All England Law Reports and more

All England Law Reports and more

WHAT’S MORE? We’ve made research even more affordable. Refer a friend or colleague who might benefit from the NZBA e-library package and you both receive a $400.00 + GST credit to your accounts, as an existing NZBA e-Library subscriber.

WHAT’S MORE? We’ve made research even more affordable. Refer a friend or colleague who might benefit from the NZBA e-library package and you both receive a $400.00 + GST credit to your accounts, as an existing NZBA e-Library subscriber.

To find out more about this offer, please send us an email at nzba@lexisnexis.co.nz or leave an Online Contact Request and we’ll get back to you.

To find out more about this offer, please send us an email at nzba@lexisnexis.co.nz or leave an Online Contact Request and we’ll get back to you.

YOUR ASSOCIATION

Pg 4 The President's Annual Report – what the Bar Association is doing

Pg 7 NZBA Council 2023-2025 – hello to new and old council members

Pg 10 New Members

Pg 11 Introducing the Junior Barristers Committee –welcoming the JBC members

Pg 13 Our Committees – who is on what committee

Pg 14 Kōrero – Bar news

Pg 31 Events

LEGAL MATTERS

Pg 17 Moot in the Hague – Mooting competition at the ICC

Pg 19 Neurodivergence in the CJS – the role of the bar (part 2)

Pg 22 Finding a Good Lawyer – Equitable briefing

PRACTICE AND LIFESTYLE

Pg 23 New Drone and Video Based Forensic Services – what they can do for your case

Pg 24 Living Holistically Through Te Whare Tapa Whā – a way of approaching well-being

Pg 27 What does "good advice" look like? –understanding financial advice

Pg 29 Petrol Heads' Corner – "Pigging out" on V8s and the Jaguar F Pace-SVR

The views expressed in the articles in this publication may not necessarily be the views of the New Zealand Bar Association

EDITORIAL COMMITTEE CONTACTS

NEW ZEALAND BAR ASSOCIATION | NGĀ AHORANGI MOTUHAKE O TE TURE

Tel: +64 9 303 4515

Email: nzbar@nzbar.org.nz

Web: www.nzbar.org.nz

PO Box 631, Auckland 1140

Lisa Mills (Contributions and advertising)

Tel: +64 9 303 4515

Email: lisa.mills@nzbar.org.nz

DESIGN AND LAYOUT BY Kirsten McLeod

Tel: +64 21 360 399

From the President

Maria Dew KC*

For this issue of At the Bar, we have reproduced the President’s Report from our Annual Report. This report was presented to the Annual General Meeting which was held on 11 August 2023. It will give members an overview of the Association’s activities across a full year. A copy of the Report is available to members on our website

Tēnā koutou katoa.

This is my first Annual Report as President of the New Zealand Bar Association | Ngā Ahorangi Motuhake o Te Ture. This year’s Report highlights the enormously valuable contributions of all our Council, Committee Members, and others at the bar and the Secretariat.

I particularly wish to pay tribute to these contributions. Busy barristers have given their time to this Association because they believe in the objectives of the Bar Association. Across Aotearoa New Zealand, we have an important community both in chambers, and for some, home offices. The strength and support that comes from having an Association that can speak up on your behalf and for the values of the independent bar is as important as ever. So, thank you for your continued support.

I took over as President on 1 October 2022, from Past President Paul Radich KC, as he was then. I want to acknowledge Justice Radich again formally in this Annual Report. I recognised then and now that he has left the Association, both financially and organisationally, in great heart as I continue my term as President through until October 2024.

This report covers the period from 1 October 2022 to 31 July 2023. It has been a busy period for the profession. We are post-Covid-19 but will never return to “normal”.

We are learning to take the best from what we have and what we have learned. I am enormously grateful to our hardworking Council, Committee members, other barristers, and our Secretariat for their contributions that fill the pages of this report.

2022 Members Survey and work since

In August 2022, we conducted our first survey of the Bar Association membership to find out what you found the most valuable aspects of being part of the Bar Association. We presented these back to the membership in October last year.

Since then, we have aimed our efforts as a Council and Secretariat to those aspects of membership you reported as most valuable to you. Many pointed to the member benefits, including the insurance scheme, the LexisNexis e-library scheme, the commercial discounts, and our training programme, which offers free CPD webinars. These tangible benefits allow members to more than recover the cost of their membership.

We have also focused on the other social and collegial initiatives that members told us they value. We have run our social “After Five” programme for nearly three years now, and in that time, attendances have grown. I want to thank all the chambers across Aotearoa New Zealand, who volunteered their premises as the venue for these events.

The survey showed that our members remain committed to supporting the independent bar and value our advocacy for barristers and our communications about matters that affect the independent bar.

Our Strategy

Following the survey, the Council took the next step to design a strategy for the next three years, 2022 to 2025, to deliver what our members considered to be the top priorities:

• Promote and encourage a strong and independent bar

• Upskilling members with relevant training/CPD

• Collegiality

• Advocating for members on regulatory matters

• Speaking out on the rule of law and law reform issues

• Technology issues in practice and the courts

• Well-being

• Increasing diversity and inclusion at the bar

• Expanding the range of member benefits offered

• Assisting young lawyers entering the field

There is more information about our Strategy and the work ahead for us on pages 26 and 27 of the Annual Report.

Law Society Independent Review

As President of the Bar Association, I have been representing our Association at the Law Society Council

meetings that have taken place. At each of these meetings, a significant topic for discussion has been the presentation of the Independent Review and then, latterly, the Law Society’s response to the Review.

I have been informed by our members and Council of feedback before responding at these meetings. We know that key to the bar’s concerns is that we do not risk undermining the importance of the legal profession’s independence, particularly the bar, in any revision of the regulatory environment for lawyers. We also know that in broad terms, most barristers were comfortable with the proposal to separate the regulatory and representative functions of the Law Society. However, the devil remains in the details of any reform, which we have yet to see.

In June 2023, the Bar Association presented its own feedback document to the Law Society, responding to the Independent Review recommendations. We are pleased to say that the Law Society has taken on board this and other feedback and has taken a cautious approach to developing the Response Document to be delivered to the Minister of Justice in August. We expect to be able to report back more fully once that Response has been given to the Minister. Legislative change will not be possible this year and will likely require much more consideration of the options next year.

Re-establishing connections with the Australian Bar

The Council has been keen to reconnect with the Australian Bar since Covid-19 stopped our travelling. In June 2023, I travelled to the Australian Bar Association Conference dinner and visited with the ABA Council to learn more about their regulatory regime. I also visited with the President of the NSW Bar to discuss issues common to both bars.

The ABA President, Peter Dunning KC, will attend our Conference in 2023 and chair our Panel discussion on Regulatory Reform.

I am also delighted to announce that we have agreed in principle to host a joint Conference with the Australian Bar Association in or about August 2024 in Queenstown. This event will allow the Bar Association members to hear about issues common to both bars and to establish relationships with those at the bar in Australia in our specialist areas of practice. The Conference will aim to present on Trans-Tasman themes in civil, criminal, and other specialist interest areas of law where we can compare developments.

Te Au Reka | Heads of Bench and Profession, Liaison Meetings

The Heads of Bench monthly meetings with the profession have continued post-Covid-19. The Heads of Bench and the profession recognise that this is a

valuable means for direct and immediate feedback between bench and bar. I continue to attend these meetings monthly. Chief High Court Judge, Justice Thomas, and Chief District Court Judge Taumaunu chair the meetings. Frequently Judges from the specialist Courts join the meetings, along with liaison judges where necessary. The Ministry of Justice, Public Defence Service, the Crown, Corrections, Police and Legal Services also attend. As a result, we can raise immediate issues of concern for the bench and profession for discussion and solutions.

On 22 June, one of these meetings was used to raise urgent well-being concerns for the criminal bar particularly, but also the civil bar. The result was an initiative the Heads of Bench took to issue the open letter to all judges in late July 2023, highlighting the need to consider well-being concerns for the profession and counsel when setting trial dates and other timetables. There are now also discussions underway, including with the Legal Services Commissioner, who will consider appointing second counsel more frequently on legal aid matters. I am pleased to say that the Bar Association’s voice at these meetings, and the feedback you give us, is listened to.

Advocacy

A significant part of our Strategy is ensuring we advocate for members on issues of importance to the bar. The Bar Association seeks to be measured and careful in analysing matters. We have not favoured media campaigns but work hard behind the scenes to encourage a resolution.

We are currently working with the Law Society and Te Ara Ture on Access to Justice issues.

We equally identify intervention issues which further our objectives. We currently have two interventions before the Courts. In both cases, we are sharing counsel with the Law Society. One of the cases involves an appeal concerning legal aid payments, and the other is about name suppression. The latter is in front of the full bench of the Employment Court.

Annual Conference 2023

Our Conference will be held this year in Ōtautahi | Christchurch at the Doubletree Hilton Château on the Park Hotel. We have a great lineup of speakers, optional activities and social events.

The Bar Association Conference programme is designed to stimulate discussions across practice areas and between the bench and bar about how we can do things differently. It is also an opportunity to learn what is happening in other areas of law that we might take back to our own. For this reason, I have always found this Conference so valuable each year. It is not designed to replace our own specialist practice areas conferences. Instead, it complements and stimulates

cross-pollination of ideas and discusses common issues relevant to the independent bar. I hope you find the same this year.

King’s Counsel Appointments

In 2023, we had the opportunity to celebrate the 2022 King’s Counsel appointments with ceremonies and dinners in Auckland and Christchurch. Our newest King’s Counsel represent the very best of the bar and the increasing recognition of the diverse pathways we can expect future King’s Counsel to come from. Congratulations to you all. There are pictures from the call to the inner bar ceremonies in the Annual Report on page 19.

The Attorney-General has informed us that, given the election in 2023, he has determined there will not be a King’s Counsel round this year. While this is unfortunate, we will ask for the 2024 appointment process to commence as early as possible in 2024.

Secretariat

Our incredibly committed Secretariat team handles an enormous volume of work. I am pleased this year to welcome Vanessa Deeney, as our new part-time Administrator, and I know she will help lighten the load.

THREE YEAR STRATEGIC GOALS

Election 2023

At the time of writing, an election is underway to appoint a President-Elect and four new Council members. The first order of business at this AGM will be to announce the results of that election.1

I want to thank all those who put their names forward as candidates. It has been heartening to see the strong interest in the Bar Association through this election.

Welcome on board to the successful candidates. I am very much looking forward to working with you all. I especially welcome the new President-Elect, Paul David KC.

I also wish to pay tribute to those Council Members who have elected not to stand for nomination, having given such valuable service. I will name and thank these members in our next issue of At the Bar

Maria Dew KC

Our Bar Council set Strategic Goals for the three years to 2025. These goals are drawn from the Rules of our Association. Under each of these Objects 1 to 5, our Council and committees have developed a set of initiatives and targets that we aim to achieve over these three years. We will report back to you on how we are tracking and looking for your support in achieving these goals.

OBJECT 1

UPHOLD AND ADVOCATE FOR THE RULE OF LAW AND ACCESS TO JUSTICE

OBJECT 2

PROMOTE EXCELLENCE IN ADVOCACY WITH HIGH QUALITY TRAINING

OBJECT 3

BE THE CENTRE FOR COLLEGIALITY, SUPPORT AND WELL-BEING AT THE BAR

OBJECT 4

PROMOTE DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION AT THE BAR

OBJECT 5

STRENGTHEN OUR GROWTH IN MEMBERSHIP

1 Profiles of the President-Elect and the new members of our Council are available on p7 of this issue.

Ngā manaakitanga

NZBA Council 2023-2025

MARIA DEW KC President (Auckland)

Maria Dew KC continues her term as president until October 2024. She is well known to members, not just through her expertise in employment law and inquiry work, but also through the mahi she does in championing access to justice

Now that that focus is no longer on Covid, Maria has had more time to turn her attention to the recent Law Society Independent Review, re-establishing connections with our colleagues at the Australian Bar and leads the council on working to achieve the goals outlined in the strategic objectives set out for the remainder of her council term.

KELLIE ARTHUR (Auckland)

Ko Whitireia te maunga

Ko Parirua te awa

Ko Raukawa te moana

Ko Tainui te waka

Ko Ngāti Toa Rangatira te iwi

Ko Takapūwāhia te marae

He tangata whenua ahau, he Pākehā

Kellie is a member of FortyEight Shortland Barristers in Tāmaki Makarau Auckland, and practises in civil and commercial litigation. She came to the Bar in 2018, from Chapman Tripp. Law is Kellie’s second career having previously worked in New Zealand and internationally, advising corporate clients on brand strategy.

This is Kellie’s second term on the Bar Council. She is co-chair of the Association’s Membership and Wellness Committee, and serves on the Diversity and Inclusion Committee.

Enhancing collegiality, diversity and inclusion at the bar is important to Kellie. She wants all lawyers and law students to be able to look at the bar, including the senior bar and King’s Counsel, and see themselves. Improving diversity happens in incremental steps. But continuing to improve diversity and inclusion at the bar is imperative if we want a strong and vital bar that is relevant to, and reflective of, the society we serve.

Kellie is also committed to working within the Bar Council in its objectives of providing professional and collegial support to its members so that we all feel supported in our work and are able to practice well. In her time on Council Kellie has worked to deliver several initiatives focused on diversity and collegiality.

These include a joint NZBA/AWLA panel discussion –Women at the Bar. She has assisted with collegiality events in South Auckland and organised the Association’s first breakfast event (to enable members who cannot attend after-work events to catch up and network with colleagues). Kellie is the NZBA/AUT mooting competition liaison. NZBA’s sponsorship of this competition promotes the Association and the Bar to a diverse cohort of law students (and hopefully future barristers).

Kellie has represented the Association in meetings with the judiciary and external contractors and will continue to meet with representatives of other associations, including the Pacific Lawyers Association, to see how our respective associations can collaborate for mutual benefit.

JOHN BILLINGTON KC (Auckland)

John joined the independent bar in 1989. At the time he was a council member of the Wellington District Law Society. He became a member of the New Zealand Bar Association Council in the early 1990s.

In 2000 John moved his practice from Wellington to Shortland Chambers, Auckland. During his time in Auckland he has acted for the ADLS, the NZLS, and been a member of the NZLS Culture Change Review Panel. More recently John has contributed to the NZLS Independent Review Panel.

John has an interest in Tikanga and Te Tiriti issues which he feels need to be part of the broader jurisprudence which guides our practise. He is passionate about more work being done around diversity in the profession and feels as a profession we collectively need to consider the representative and regulatory function debate.

Throughout his time in practice, he has been vitally interested in the place the broader law profession occupies in our community, and specifically a role of the bar. It is this interest which prompted him to stand for the Bar Council again this year with the hope that he will be in a position to assist the bar in navigating the changes the profession will have to confront.

VICTORIA CASEY KC (Wellington)

Victoria joined the Bar Council as a Wellington representative in September 2021 and will remain on the Bar Council for the upcoming term. She has previously served as the Chair of the Law Society’s Human Rights Committee, presented on numerous

aspects of public and administrative law, and provided pro bono representation on matters of public interest.

Victoria recognises the importance of the Bar Association providing collegial support as well as professional leadership, and has a special interest in supporting junior members of the Bar to progress in ways that work best for them. She believes that acknowledging the value of non-traditional career paths will help improve the diversity of the profession.

PHILLIP CORNEGÉ (Waikato/Bay of Plenty)

Phillip is in his third term on Council and is an active member of the Association’s Technology and Education Committees. He is the Association’s Treasurer and Secretary and has been in that role for the past two terms.

Phillip is an experienced litigator, providing advice and representation on a range of civil, criminal, and public law matters. He also acts for defendants in regulatory and professional disciplinary proceedings, and before sporting (including racing) disciplinary bodies.

Phillip has worked as in-house counsel as well as in the litigation departments of Bell Gully and Minter Ellison Rudd Watts and Almao Douch (Hamilton Crown Solicitor). Phillip came to the bar in 2014. He is a member of Riverbank Chambers in Hamilton.

PAUL DAVID KC President-Elect (Auckland)

Paul joins the council as PresidentElect. He began his career at the Bar of England and Wales. He moved to Aotearoa New Zealand, where from 1990 he worked at Russell McVeagh, later becoming a partner. In 2002, he and some colleagues founded Wilson Harle. Paul joined the independent bar in 2006 and the Bar Association in 2014, the same year he took Silk.

Paul’s practice is primarily commercial law and his areas of specialist practice are maritime and sports law.

Paul has dedicated himself to the ethical independent practice of law throughout his career, and is passionate about the importance of the role of the bar for the proper working of civil society. He is committed to the development of young lawyers.

Paul believes that the Bar Association will need to consider the potentially far-reaching consequences for the profession of the changes proposed by the Independent Review and also consider its current rules and objectives under the new Incorporated Societies Act.

Paul looks forward to joining the Council, listening to members’ current concerns and working with the Council on how to address issues like court backlogs,

an overall increase in the demands imposed by cases and increasing technological challenges, as well as the public concern of access to justice. The Association can play an important role in all parts of the dispute resolution process for the benefit of all.

SAVANNA GASKELL Junior Barrister Representative (Otago/ Southland)

Savanah is a Junior Barrister at Barristers Chambers in Dunedin, where she works for three senior barristers. Her work spans several practice areas, including criminal, civil & commercial, family, resource management, mental health and ACC.

Savanna is passionate about promoting opportunities for junior barristers, and increasing the profile of the junior bar in Aotearoa. She is a member of the Junior Barristers sub-committee on council.

Savanna believes the NZBA has a vital role to play in fostering collegiality among its members, and providing support— particularly in light of recent concerns about the wellbeing of the profession. This includes advocating for members in relation to the NZLS Independent Review and ongoing Law Society reforms. She looks forward to working with Council as we navigate these changes.

GENEVIEVE HASZARD (Waikato/Bay of Plenty)

Genevieve joined the Bar Council in September 2021 as one of the two Waikato/Bay of Plenty District representatives. Her primary practice base is in Tauranga and Te Puke but as a member of Kate Sheppard Chambers she has a national reach and often acts for clients outside the Tauranga region on various criminal, civil, family and coronial matters. Genevieve’s Bar Council role allows her to contribute to the broader functions and work of the NZ Bar Association. Genevieve is particularly interested in assisting with the work of the Bar Council in upholding the rule of law, law reform in the area of criminal and family law and practical ways to improve access to justice and the legal aid framework. In addition, Genevieve is an advocate for the continued development of a positive culture of practicing well, ensuring our bar members remain resilient and healthy and improving the diversity and inclusiveness of the independent bar and the legal profession generally. Genevieve is a member of our Conference Committee and is the current co-chair of the Diversity and Inclusion Committee.

SARAH JEREBINE (Auckland)

Sarah joined the bar four years ago. She has practised law for over 20 years, both in private practice at large firms, and as Crown Counsel at the Crown Law Office. She enjoys being a barrister, including the challenges and freedoms, and the community, that life at the independent bar brings. She stood for the Bar Council to give back some of the support she has received, and to help build and strengthen our legal community.

Sarah specialises in civil litigation and public law, bringing claims for and against the state. As part of her practice, she also accepts a number of counsel assisting appointments, often dealing with access to justice, poverty, youth offending, prisoners’ claims, and uplift of children by the state, which she sees as critically important areas of the law. Sarah is an active member of the New Zealand Law Society, sitting on its Rule of Law Committee, and holds a representative role as a council member for the Auckland Branch of the NZLS.

RICHARD MCGUIRE Associate Member Rep (Canterbury)

Richard has been with the Public Defence Service since 2011. Prior to this time he was a director in a firm in Christchurch where he had a general practice, including a focus on criminal defence law, and family law. He held appointments as lawyer for child and youth advocate. He is a former President of the Canterbury Criminal Bar Association. Richard is a member of the NZBA Criminal Committee, Membership Committee and the Access to Justice Committee and is currently working on refreshing the mentoring programme for the Bar Association.

TIHO MIJATOV (Wellington)

Tiho is a barrister at Stout Street Chambers, Wellington. He has experience in a wide range of commercial, public law, criminal and disciplinary matters and regularly appears in courts at first instance and on appeal. Tiho has been involved with the NZBA for several years. His work has included preparation of legal submissions for the NZBA’s intervention in court cases; law reform submissions on matters as varied as access to justice civil reforms, evidence, and professional rules; and guidance on public comment and media statements on rule of law issues. Tiho looks forward to the NZBA continuing to promote the practice of law at the independent bar.

RICHARD RAYMOND KC (Canterbury)

Richard graduated with a BCom LLB from the University of Otago in 1988. He then worked in commercial litigation in leading Wellington and London firms before returning to New Zealand and the Crown Solicitor’s Office in Christchurch in 1993. He was appointed Senior Crown Counsel and was an Associate of Raymond Donnelly & Co.

In 1997 Richard joined the litigation team at Duncan Cotterill and became a partner in 1998. He led a large team of litigators and built a significant commercial and insurance litigation practice. He was on the firm’s Board for several years and served as Chairman before joining the independent bar in 2011.

Richard was appointed Queen’s Counsel in 2016. He has held several governance roles with various organisations and for the past four years been part of a new initiative in the Canterbury Westland region of NZLS with a sole focus on the well-being of practitioners. This has included the development of extensive programmes for junior and intermediate solicitors which have now been rolled out across New Zealand.

Richard will be looking for opportunities to introduce similar initiatives for junior members of the bar across regions which to date may not have had the same access to the courses which have been established.

As with others on the council, Richard is looking forward to the challenges which will present in the coming years with the proposed changes to the structure of how lawyers may be regulated in New Zealand and continue promoting the benefits of the NZBA and collegiality in the profession.

RACHAEL REED KC (Auckland)

Rachael practices at the intersection of criminal and civil law, primarily concentrating on acting for clients charged with fraud, financial or regulatory crimes or facing civil proceedings arising from similar allegations. She continues to conduct a few legal aid assignments a year around her other commitments.

Currently her pro bono work includes acting for two clients leading the Dilworth Class Action Group for survivors of sexual abuse at Dilworth.

Rachael’s previous roles have included President of Auckland Women Lawyers Association, five years on an Auckland Standards Committee (as a member and as convenor) and she is currently on the Friends Panel (sensitive issues) for NZLS. She sits on tribunals and conducts advocacy training internationally.

All of this experience she looks forward to bringing

to her work on the Bar Council to strive to make a difference. Rachael is very committed to the Bar and the development of junior barristers through its ranks. Rachael is based in Auckland at City Chambers and has been since 2012.

TIM STEPHENS (Wellington)

Tim joined the independent bar in 2017 at Stout Street Chambers after being a partner for eleven years at Simpson Grierson. He has been a lawyer for over 25 years, including time working in London and obtaining the BCL at Oxford.

At the bar, Tim has a broad commercial, regulatory, and public law litigation practice. He has appeared at all levels of the New Zealand courts and in numerous arbitrations on behalf of clients ranging from Ministers, regulators, and listed companies, to SMEs, family trusts, and individuals. He has been counsel assisting coronial inquiries and is counsel for the Crown in the Porirua ki Manawatū Inquiry, which is the last major historical inquiry before the Waitangi Tribunal.

Tim also acts on pro bono and legal aid cases. He appeared for NZLS as intervener in the proceedings

brought by Andrew Borrowdale challenging the legality of the first lockdown in 2020. Last year, he acted on legal aid for two prisoners in a successful challenge to the rates of earnings set by the Minister of Corrections for work carried out in prison.

Tim has recently resigned from his role as the Convenor of the Law Reform Committee of NZLS, and is looking forward to his time on the Bar Council. He hopes to promote the values of NZBA and the perspective of our sector in legislative and policy-making processes, particularly in ensuring that the anticipated new regulatory regime for lawyers is fit-for-purpose for the modern bar.

OFFICERS AND CO-OPTED COUNCIL MEMBERS

Our Rules of Association allow the Council to coopt up to five members to the council to meet certain needs. Co-opted members will be appointed when the new Council meets for the first time in October. The Council will also appoint the office holders, including the Vice-Presidents, Treasurer and Secretary, at that meeting.

If you have any questions, please contact our Executive Director via our website contact form at https://www.nzbar.org.nz/contact-nzba

New Members

Anna Adams AUCKLAND

Tasha (Tash) Anderson AUCKLAND

Shonagh Burnhill CANTERBURY

Julia Clancy AUCKLAND

Catherine Cull KC NORTHLAND

Heida Donegan AUCKLAND

Stephanie (Steph) Dyhrberg WELLINGTON

Graeme Edgeler WELLINGTON

Scott Gazley AUCKLAND

Guy Guilford AUCKLAND

Kerry Hadaway WAIKATO

Steve Haszard AUCKLAND

Lewis Hebden AUCKLAND

Bernice Henry AUCKLAND

Daniel Josephs AUCKLAND

Amrit Kaur AUCKLAND

Peter Kelly WELLINGTON

Daniel Kirby CANTERBURY

Eesevan Krishnan WAIKATO

Katie Lane OTAGO

Bridget Lawler AUCKLAND

Anna Lloyd CANTERBURY

Nikola (Nik) Marinovich TARANAKI

Andrew McCormick CANTERBURY Philip (Phil) Mcdonnell CANTERBURY

Jadeine McLeod WELLINGTON

Arvind Nair AUCKLAND

Cherie Phillips AUCKLAND

Thomas Powell WELLINGTON

Annie Rakena AUCKLAND

Alan Rowe AUCKLAND

James Ruddell AUCKLAND

Serene Sakairi AUCKLAND

Michael Sandom CANTERBURY

Patrick Senior AUCKLAND

Josh Suyker AUCKLAND

Ella Tait WELLINGTON

Jacquelyn Thompson AUCKLAND

Matewai Tukapua WELLINGTON

Rosslyn Warren AUCKLAND

Rebekah Webby BAY OF PLENTY

Amy West AUCKLAND

Clinton (Kaleb) Whyte WAIKATO

Rachel Wilson AUCKLAND

John Wimsett AUCKLAND

Joanna (Jo) Woodcock TARANAKI

Introducing the Junior Barristers Committee

The President and Council are delighted to announce that a Junior Barristers’ Committee has recently been formed. Maria Dew KC thanks the junior barristers willing to serve on this Committee and support the junior bar.

What is a junior barrister?

There are a variety of definitions of a junior barrister. From the Bar Association's point of view, a junior barrister has less than seven years post-admission experience. That experience is not limited to time as a barrister. It includes experience in a law firm or in-house.

In some cases, a barrister may have been admitted many years ago but spent little time in practice. In those cases, we may consider an arrangement that will allow them to participate in junior barrister activities and receive the same support as junior barristers. Applications for this status should be made to the Executive Director.

What does the Committee do?

Aside from the general representation of juniors, the Committee organises targeted events and liaises with the Education Committee by suggesting CPD training. The JBC also reports to the Membership Committee on issues such as mentoring and commercial benefits via our membership app.

The JBC has been advocating for Juniors to have a more significant presence at and involvement in the NZBA Annual Conference. Part of this effort has been negotiating sponsorship for juniors to attend the conference. This is especially important this year as the conference will host a session explicitly focused on juniors: Junioring a Different Way.

Finally, within the next few weeks, the JBC will release a survey of juniors to build a clearer picture of the Junior Barrister workforce across the country. Using this information, the Committee will focus on targeted services and activities.

The Committee Members

Anna Price (Co-Chair)

Anna graduated LLB from Victoria University of Wellington in 2018. She also holds a BA in history.

Anna works with Kathryn Dalziel at Walker Street Chambers in civil litigation, privacy and employment law. She has a background in

Police prosecutions and continues to work in criminal litigation. She volunteers with Community Law Canterbury.

Sarah Courtney (Co-Chair)

Sarah is a junior barrister to Harry Waalkens KC, at Quay Chambers. She currently practises in the medico-legal litigation space. Before joining the bar, she clerked and was a solicitor at Reflective Construction Law.

Jane Barrow

Jane is a junior barrister at Britomart Chambers. She began her career as a tax solicitor, defending taxpayers in civil disputes and criminal proceedings. She moved to Harmos Horton Lusk where she assisted in Overseas Investment Act compliance and investigations, SFO investigations and corporate matters.

Most recently, Jane was at Shortland Chambers, acting as junior counsel on various commercial, civil, regulatory and family matters.

Jane provides advisory and advocacy services to commercial and private clients on all civil disputes.

James Clark

James is a barrister employed by King's Counsels Simon Foote and Jason Goodall.

James attended Victoria University of Wellington, graduating in 2020 with a Bachelor of Laws and a Bachelor of Arts (majoring in history). He was included on the Dean's list for academic excellence and was an assistant student editor of the Victoria University of Wellington Law Review (VUWLR). James was admitted to the bar in 2021.

Before commencing work at Bankside Chambers, James worked as a lawyer at Bell Gully on corporate transactions, including private and public mergers and acquisitions, and private equity matters.

Savanna Gaskell

Savanna provides litigation support to Len Andersen KC, Royden Somerville KC, Alison Douglass and Mark Kirkland in Barristers Chambers. She works on a broad range of legal matters, including criminal, civil and commercial, employment, family, resource management, mental health, and ACC.

Savanna holds a dual role on Council as the Junior Barrister and Otago/Southland regional representative.

Abbie Hollingworth

Abbie is an employed barrister with Kerryn Beaton KC at Walker Street Chambers. She graduated with LLB and BCom degrees from the University of Canterbury and was admitted in October 2017.

Before joining the bar, Abbie was a junior lawyer at the Public Defence Service in Christchurch. She continues to specialise in

Daniel Joseph

Daniel is a junior barrister employed by Maria Dew KC. He graduated Bachelor of Laws and Bachelor of Arts from the University of Auckland and joined Gaze Burt in January 2021 as a law clerk in the employment law team. Daniel was admitted to the bar in November

2021 and continued to practice as a barrister and solicitor in employment law. He moved to the bar and Britomart Chambers in May 2023.

Diana Qiu

Diana is a junior barrister at Thorndon Chambers. Before that, she clerked for two Presidents of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, Justice Stephen Kós (2021–2022) and Justice Mark Cooper (2022). During her clerkship, she worked on various public, private and criminal cases.

Diana graduated fourth in her cohort from the University of Auckland in 2021 with a BA and LLB(Hons). She was a Senior Scholar and competed successfully in numerous national and international mooting competitions.

Diana is keenly interested in public law, human rights law and international law, and commercial and investorstate arbitration. She was admitted to the bar in 2022.

Liberty Soanes

Liberty is a Law Clerk at Kanuka Chambers. She graduated from Victoria University, having made the Deans List for excellence in 2018.

If you want to know more about the JBC, please email the committee members

The New Zealand Bar Association | Ngā Ahorangi Motuhake o te Ture would like to thank its generous sponsors of the 2023 Annual Conference being held in Ōtautahi Christchurch 15-16 September.

Our Committee Members

Advocacy

Felix Geiringer (Co-Chair)

Yvonne Mortimer-Wang (Co-Chair)

Gurbrinder Singh Aulakh

Aedeen Boadita-Cormican

Dr Petra Butler

Victoria Casey KC

Chris Corry

Maria Dew KC

Toby Gee

Michael McKay

Tiho Mijatov

Warren Pyke

Anne Toohey

Craig Tuck

Monique van Alphen Fyfe

Alan Webb

Garry Williams

Te Ao Māori Komiti

Gowan Duff (Co-Chair)

Kingi Snelgar (Co-Chair)

Marie Taylor-Cyphers

Joanne Wickliffe

Maggie Winterstein

Diversity and Inclusion

Genevieve Haszard (Co-Chair)

Iswari (Ish) Jayanandan (Co-Chair)

Kellie Arthur

Gurbrinder Singh Aulakh

Aedeen Boadita-Cormican

Karen Feint KC

Yvonne Mortimer-Wang

Nura Taefi

Anne Toohey

Commercial

Stephen Layburn (Chair)

Jane Meares

Debra Angus

Education

Christopher Gudsell KC (Co-Chair)

James Rapley KC (Co-Chair)

Phillip Cornegé

Shane Elliott

Stephanie Grieve KC

Michael Lennard

Stephanie Marsden

Richard McGuire

Nikki Pender

Phil Shamy

Sarah Wroe

Garry Williams

Maggie Winterstein

Junior Barristers

Sarah Courtney (Co-Chair)

Anna Price (Co-Chair)

Jane Barrow

James Clark

Savanna Gaskell

Abbie Hollingworth

Daniel Josephs

Dianna Qiu

Liberty Soanes

Membership and Well-being

Simon Foote KC (Co-Chair)

Kellie Arthur (Co-Chair)

Aedeen Boadita-Cormican

Gowan Duff

Felix Geiringer

Taryn Gudmanz

Sam Jeffs

Richard McGuire

Rachael Schmidt-McCleave

Phil Shamy

Rosemary Thomson

Management

Maria Dew KC (Chair)

Phillip Cornegé

Simon Foote KC

Felix Geiringer

Anne Toohey

Maggie Winterstein

JOIN OUR COMMITTEES!

Criminal

James Rapley KC (Co-Chair)

Iswari (Ish) Jayanandan (Co-Chair)

Kerryn Beaton KC

Helen Coutts

Matthew Goodwin

Katie Hogan

Nicolette Levy KC

Robert Lithgow KC

Sarah Mandeno

Richard Marchant

Richard McGuire

Yvonne Mortimer-Wang

Emma Priest

Mark Ryan

Phil Shamy

Simon Shamy

Marie Taylor-Cyphers

Craig Tuck

Employment Law and Privacy

Rachel Burt (Chair)

Maria Austen

Kathryn Dalziel

Geoff Davenport

Maria Dew KC

Stephanie Dyhrberg

Tanya Kennedy

Andrew Marsh

Juliet Philpott

Karen Radich

Rachael Schmidt-McCleave

Philip Skelton KC

Catherine Stewart

Ella Tait

Jenni-Maree Trotman

Steven Wragg

Family

Stephanie Marsden (Chair)

Deborah Inder

Stephen McCarthy KC

Jennifer Wademan

If you are interested in helping with the work undertaken by any of our committees, please contact us. We would love to have you.

Justice Paul Davison is retiring at the end of August after almost eight years on the High Court bench. Details of his Honour's valedictory sitting are on our website

His Honour was admitted to the bar in February 1975. He began practice as a solicitor with Stuart Ennor at Glaister Ennor and Kiff. He moved to Keegan Alexander Tedcastle and Friedlander where he became a partner in 1978. There he undertook civil litigation and criminal defence work, and while at the firm he represented the estate of the Air New Zealand pilot, Captain Collins at the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Air New Zealand DC 10 accident at Mt Erebus in Antarctica.

Justice Davison was appointed as a foundation member of the Crown Solicitor’s Prosecution Panel in 1981 and conducted prosecutions on behalf of the Crown, helping the then Crown Solicitor David Morris in a number of notable criminal cases including R v Tamihere.

He commenced practice as barrister in 1990, and was appointed Queen’s Counsel in 1996. Paul Davison QC represented the Crown in several major criminal prosecutions including R v Watson and also undertook defence work including a series of prosecutions of finance company directors in the period following 2008, as well as maintaining a civil practice.

Justice Davison was a member of the SFO prosecutors Panel and also on the panel of lawyers engaged by the professional indemnity underwriters CE Heath in relation to civil claims against lawyers and accountants. He was appointed to the High Court in December 2015.

Following retirement from the Bench, Justice Davison will return to the profession to undertake mediations and consultancy work.

Justice Preston

The Bar Association warmly congratulates Lisa Preston KC, who has been appointed to the High Court Bench. Justice Preston was a barrister at Bridgeside Chambers. She joined the independent bar in 2014, specialising in criminal jury trials and appellate work receiving instructions on behalf of the defence and the Crown, medico-legal, professional indemnity and professional disciplinary litigation and acting in coronial inquiries.

She holds appointments to the Panel of Independent Legal Counsel to assist Te Kāhui Tatari Ture, the Criminal Cases Review Commission, the Commerce Commission’s Cartel Prosecutors Panel, and the

Solicitor-General’s Senior Crown Prosecution Panel. Justice Preston was appointed King’s Counsel in 2022.

Justice Preston will take up her appointment on 16 October 2023, sitting in Christchurch. She will be sworn in on 17 October 2023.

Augusta Chambers

Having outgrown the Blackstone Chambers building, the chambers members have moved to a new, larger space at Level 9, 115 Queen Street, Auckland CBD (off Swanson Lane). The new chambers is called Augusta Chambers named after Dame Augusta Wallace, the first female judge in New Zealand, who was appointed in 1975. Dame Augusta worked in the Auckland District Courts in service to the community. Prior to this Dame Augusta worked as a lawyer, at a time when only 2% of lawyers were women. She worked when pregnant and with a young baby which was unprecedented at the time. She is survived by her daughter, also a lawyer, who gave her permission to the use of the name.

Julie-Anne Kincade KC and Emma Priest head the new chambers. The chambers continues to offer expertise in criminal, regulatory

and appellate law with a civil offering also. Augusta Chambers has a commitment to access to justice, with all members taking legal aid assignments. Along with Julie-Anne Kincade KC and Emma Priest, you will find Nick Chisnall KC, Susan Gray, Nicola Manning, Scott Brickell, Shane Elliott, Devon Kemp, Oliver Troon, Susan Giles, Harry Redwood, Aeiyah Shendi and Lila Tui’i.

www.augustachambers.co.nz

Britomart Chambers

Yvonne Mortimer-Wang

Britomart Chambers is delighted to welcome Yvonne Mortimer-Wang into its busy collegial space. Yvonne is an excellent fit with Britomart’s group of top public law, regulatory and criminal experts.

Yvonne has over a decade’s experience in litigation, with particular expertise in commercial crimes, civil fraud litigation, proceeds of crime, regulatory and professional disciplinary proceedings. She acts for clients in criminal and civil proceedings at all level of courts, and is equally experienced in acting as the sole or lead counsel on

The Hon. Justice Paul Davison retires from the High Court bench

matters, or working together with senior counsel from across leading sets in New Zealand.

Prior to Britomart Chambers, Yvonne was most recently held tenancy at Shortland Chambers. She also worked previously as a Crown prosecutor in criminal prosecutions and acted for government clients in civil proceedings.

Yvonne is a co-chair of the Advocacy Committee and a member of the Diversity Committee of the New Zealand Bar Association. She is a board member of the New Zealand Asian Lawyers, and a co-chair of its Litigation Committee. She is bilingual in English and Chinese.

Bankside Chambers

New members

Anna Adams was warmly welcomed to Bankside. Previously a partner with Meredith Connell for more than 15 years, Anna is a national-level expert in public, health and regulatory law with over 25 years’ experience in advisory work and litigation, from largescale public cases through to small, personal matters. Anna’s experience includes public, administrative and local government law (particularly Auckland’s legislation and infrastructure), judicial review, medicolegal proceedings and health law, coroners’ inquiries, human rights and vulnerable persons’ law, education law, privacy and information law including online safety issues. She has a particular skill in medical evidence and healthcare-related matters including concerns arising from patient, practitioner and hospital, professional discipline, medicines, mental health and capacity, and the treatment environment.

also recently welcomed juniors Eden (Jedi) McCarthy and Te Uranga Royal. Te Uranga is employed by Brian Dickey and Kingi Snelgar. She attended the University of Waikato where she was a Russell McVeagh scholar and graduated with a Bachelor of Laws (Honours). In 2022, she also completed a Diploma in Te Pīnakitanga ki te Reo Kairangi (Level 7) from Te Wānanga o Aotearoa. Before joining Bankside, Te Uranga clerked for the Chief District Court Judge, Judge Heemi Taumaunu. Te Uranga is from Ngāti Maahanga (Waikato), Ngāti Whanaunga and Ngāti Raukawa. Jedi is a barrister employed by Sarah Jerebine and Kingi Snelgar. Graduating from The University of Auckland, with a Bachelor of Laws (Honours) and a Bachelor of Health Sciences, Jedi was admitted to the bar recently in July 2023. Her whakapapa includes Ngāti Wai, Ngāpuhi, and the villages of Sala’ilua and Falealili in Samoa.

Bankside Singapore

Bankside Singapore members Hon Paul Heath KC, Dr Anna Kirk, Jeremy Johnson, and Lauren Lindsay have been selected to deliver a seminar on Insolvency and Arbitration at 2023 Hong Kong Arbitration Week: how to navigate disputes with an insolvent party. Coming to its 12th year, Hong Kong Arbitration Week is one of the key events on the global international arbitration and dispute resolution calendar. Bankside Singapore is a proud bronze sponsor of Hong Kong Arbitration Week, which will take place at the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, 16–20 October.

Awards

We congratulate Mark Kelly for being recognised as one of New Zealand's 26 Most Influential Lawyers. NZ Lawyer's Most Influential Lawyers of 2023 showcases how lawyers can be a positive force for good within the profession, as well as in their own communities and across the country.

Appointment to High Court – Laura O’Gorman KC

Laura O'Gorman KC has been appointed as a Judge of the High Court. Justice O’Gorman will take up her appointment on Monday 23 October 2023, sitting in Auckland. She will be sworn in on Thursday 26 October 2023. Laura will be missed by all of us at Bankside. Laura shares, “I have loved my time as a barrister sole at Bankside Chambers. I have enjoyed four years of wonderful collegiality, flexibility and independence. It is therefore with some trepidation that I take this next step. I know there will be a steep learning curve, but I am looking forward to the new challenges ahead." We wish Laura all the best in this exciting new challenge ahead.

Maria Austin joins Kānuka

Maria Austen has recently joined Kānuka Chambers where she will continue to specialise in employment law and risk management as a trusted advisor for private entities and public sector organisations

Maria provides strategic and pragmatic advice on complex and high value matters for employers and acts for clients through all stages of dispute resolution within the specialist employment jurisdiction. Maria is regularly appointed to undertake high profile independent investigations, holds the AWI-CH distinction and sits on the NZBA Employment Law and Privacy Committee.

Masons Lane Chambers - Wellington

Barristers Asher Emanuel, Hunter de Groot, Matt McKillop and Oliver Neas have joined to form Masons Lane Chambers based in Wellington. Members of Masons Lane Chambers are available to accept instructions as lead or junior counsel.

Asher Emanuel has expertise in public and administrative law, the Treaty of Waitangi, professional disciplinary processes, and government inquiries. Previously Asher worked as a judges' clerk at the High Court, an investigator in the Office of the InspectorGeneral of Intelligence and Security, and a junior barrister at Clifton Chambers.

Hunter de Groot is an experienced criminal barrister with expertise at the appellate level, appearing mostly

as lead counsel in the Court of Appeal. Before joining the independent bar in 2018, Hunter spent five years at John Miller Law specialising in medico-legal litigation.

Matt McKillop has expertise in administrative law, human rights law, discrimination, medico-legal and disability issues, and general civil litigation. Before joining the bar in 2022, Matt worked at Crown Law in the Constitutional and Human Rights team for nine years.

Oliver Neas has a broad range of litigation experience, with a focus on criminal law, commercial litigation, and administrative and public law. He joined the bar in 2021, after working in commercial litigation at Chapman Tripp and as a legal aid criminal defence lawyer at the Public Defence Service.

Looking for someone to help you with work overflow?

Paralegal litigation services including drafting, research and litigation support available on a contracting basis. Either ad hoc or fixed hours. I am admitted to the High Court as a barrister and solicitor with 8 years' practising experience and 8 years' additional contracting experience.

For enquiries please contact: Kara Scott Legal Assistant E kara.legalassistant@gmail.com

(left to right) Asher Emanuel, Hunter de Groot, Matt McKillop and Oliver Neas

Moot in the Hague

Iswari Jayanandan*

After surviving a gruelling 13-week, multi-accused High Court trial - away from home comforts, one would expect to relax and recuperate – or at least engage in less stressful endeavours in one’s own stomping grounds. But not for me though; I had an opportunity I just couldn’t refuse.

My downtime consisted of an 18,000km journey to the other side of the world to take part in a mooting competition organised by the International Bar Association in conjunction with the International Criminal Court (ICC). This competition had been a fixture in my diary for quite some time, with participation anticipated via zoom. When I was offered the opportunity to appear in person it was too hard to resist.

I accepted with great enthusiasm and set off to the Leiden University campus in The Hague, Netherlands, where the preliminary rounds were held. I observed the final round at the ICC, not wanting to miss this rare opportunity to enter what in essence is the holy summit for human rights enthusiasts such as myself.

The ICC, of course, deals with offending on an entirely different dimension. Where leading murder trials involving one or two deceased would be commonplace in my practice, dealing with someone standing trial for mass murder is somewhat more sobering – a far cry indeed from my typical South Auckland murder accused!

The moot topic

In my role as a Judge of the Appeals Chamber of the ICC, together with two fellow judges, I had the arduous task of testing the logic and validity of arguments from participants appearing for the defendant, the prosecution and the Government of the aggrieved State.

The fictional case concerned the actions of the defendant, the Chief Executive Officer of one of the world’s most successful biotechnology corporations which was owned and controlled by the aggrieved State’s neighbouring nation. The defendant had ordered the release of genetically modified, pesticide resistant insects, resulting in large scale devastation of not just crops, but also

lives – with 20,000 dying from starvation and a further 5,000 as a result of suicide.

The pre-trial Chamber confirmed the charge of a form of ‘ecocide’, in essence, a crime against humanity with widespread human casualties pursuant to the ICC Statute. The case involved the added conundrum that neither State was party to the Rome Statute at the time of the offending, with only the aggrieved State filing a declaration accepting ICC jurisdiction after the fact.

The case called for argument not only in terms of whether the act in question sufficiently constituted an offence against humanity, but also whether there were procedural, evidential and jurisdictional issues needing evaluation.

Attendees

Undergraduate and postgraduate students from 50 nations spent 6 days earnestly competing in 15 preliminary rounds, to reach the finals. These students came from Albania to Uzbekistan, with ethnic diversity from the regions of Africa, Asia, Europe, the Americas and Oceania. They totalled 90 teams, and included students from varying backgrounds, representing countries such as Iran and Ukraine where the rule of law and personal safety are burning issues.

My fellow Judges similarly hailed from all corners of the world, bringing a wealth of knowledge and skill. They included sitting judges, counsel involved in ICC/ UN work, academics, advocates and barristers sole, like myself.

There were rules of procedure, precedents, and

Treaties/ Statutes, all unfamiliar to me; given my purely domestic experience, I needed to quickly familiarise myself, and my ability to do so was a welcome relief.

Learnings

Apart from the opportunity to enhance my knowledge, I discovered great joy in the many collegial events which provided the chance to engage in intellectual discourse and an exchange of ideas about both national and international law. It was exhilarating. It was equally heartening to witness great camaraderie and warmth.

Importantly, I have learned that despite my nearly 20 years of exclusive defence experience, I was not always convinced by arguments in favour of the defendant. This reinforced my conviction that it is the logic of

represented, that is most appealing to me. That is pleasing.

The attraction to participate in something like this, despite my lack of work experience in the international realm, arises from my intense fascination with legal principles and the age old art of advocacy – in essence, debating on a grand scale. I will always be grateful to my father, my greatest mentor, who instilled in me the need to think for myself, have an opinion, develop a reasoned argument, and have the courage to express it.

I must confess that I am deeply drawn to this exciting forum of learning and adventure and look forward to continuing this journey in the years to come!

* Iswari Jayanandan is a criminal barrister practising in South

Neurodivergence in the CJS and the role of the bar (part 2)

Dr Tom Smith*

This article first appeared in the October and November 2022 issues of Counsel, the magazine of the Bar of England and Wales.

Alongside directly engaging and communicating with a neurodivergent client, the lawyer must also be their advocate in a court setting. Representing a neurodivergent defendant before judges and juries requires a barrister to understand who their client is and how they might be perceived by others. Protecting their best interests involves ensuring that this does not unfairly disadvantage a defendant during trial or sentence. This is particularly important in relation to the language, demeanour, and behaviour of a neurodivergent individual.

These aspects of the defendant may appear significantly different to neurotypical defendants; they may deviate from the expectations of judges and juries as to appropriate language and behaviour in a court setting and, as a result, may be perceived negatively. Neurodivergent defendants in court may ‘present’ (that is, display outward signs of their neurodivergence) in different ways. An autistic defendant might appear visibly or outwardly unemotional or inexpressive, even if the issues in a trial might be expected to evoke visible emotional reactions in participants (Allely

and Cooper, 2017). A defendant with ADHD might fidget, or outwardly appear inattentive or bored by proceedings. Autistic and ADHD defendants might interrupt or interject at inappropriate times (such as during a complainant’s testimony) (see, for example, R v Thompson [2014] EWCA 836). A defendant with a tic disorder may regularly make unusual or disconcerting noises or movements during proceedings.

All of the above are relatively common and often overlap – an autistic defendant might display all of the above. Various neurodivergent conditions – including acquired brain injury, dyslexia and dyspraxia – can cause individuals to appear confused; be slow to respond to questions; or appear unable recall information (Criminal Justice Joint Inspection (CJII) 2021). The stress and abnormality of the court setting may exacerbate presentations of neurodivergence, leading to exaggeration of such features. In contrast, some neurodivergent defendants may appear to be hyperverbal, eloquent and cognisant of proceedings – when in fact this is a ‘camouflage’, disguising their actual level of understanding (Lai et al., 2017).

Without this context and understanding, neurodivergent presentation in court may be perceived negatively (or its impact underestimated). Neurodivergent individuals who fidget, avoid eye contact or do not answer questions directly might be unfairly and inaccurately perceived as being untrustworthy, suspicious or guilty (Allely and Cooper, 2017). Those who appear unemotional, unresponsive or bored might be judged to lack remorse or be unconcerned about proceedings. Interruptions might be regarded as disrespectful, rude or deliberately disruptive. These perceptions could damage an individual’s credibility in court (particularly before a jury); lead to unfair convictions or punishments; or restrict their ability to participate (for example, being excluded from proceedings).

With this in mind, barristers should seek to ensure that a defendant’s atypical demeanour, behaviour or language is not misjudged and punished; but understood for what it is – an expression of their neurodivergence, which may be difficult to manage or represent a coping strategy in a situation of stress. Doing so not only requires barristers to recognise these differences in their clients, what they mean and why they happen; but to effectively communicate this to the judges, juries and others involved in proceedings. It should not be assumed that the court or other parties will independently recognise and understand a defendant’s presentation. A failure to recognise and understand these potential barriers and to explain them through effective advocacy will undermine a client’s best interests, as well as failing the interests of justice generally.

Equal access to proceedings

Ensuring that a neurodivergent individual can participate in proceedings – for example, being able to give and understand evidence – also requires barristers to take action. A neurodivergent client may find court proceedings more stressful, confusing, and distracting than other individuals. The language used and the methods of questioning deployed by opposing barristers may be difficult to understand or engage with. There may be too much or too little sensory input in the court environment (for example, differences in light, noise, temperature), leading to distraction or distress (Crane et al., 2009). The pace of proceedings and the pressure of the circumstances may be overwhelming for a neurodivergent individual. For example, in R v RT and Stuchfield [2020] EWCA Crim 155, a witness with ADHD had a lengthy wait to give evidence, followed by cross-examination which involved lengthy, complex, repetitive and aggressive questioning. The witness refused to return to court after a short break and gave no more evidence.

Transposing this into the context of a defendant, significant barriers could arise. The defendant may refuse to give evidence, which will inevitably undermine

how they are perceived (and may lead to adverse inferences under s 35, Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994). If they do give evidence, they may be unable to cope with the circumstances, affecting their ability give best evidence (that is, accurate, coherent, and complete (Smith and Shaw, 2022)). They may engage in coping behaviours to manage stress (such as ‘stimming’ (Kapp, et al., 2019)), with such behaviours being misunderstood or misinterpreted without context and understanding (as described above). Again, if barristers fail to intervene to explain and mitigate these negative consequences, they are arguably not acting in the defendant’s best interests; and undermine the interests of justice generally. Moreover, the wellbeing of the defendant is negatively affected by a highly stressful experience, with risks for their mental and physical health (Slavny-Cross, 2022).

How the Bar and the CJS might adapt

To manage these challenges, significant change is needed. Evidence suggests that court professionals have limited training on and understanding of neurodivergence. For example, Maras and others (2017) found only a third had received training on autism; and autistic individuals and carers felt largely unsatisfied and misunderstood by lawyers. Allely and Cooper (2017) have argued there is a ‘need for lawyers to become adept at asking appropriate questions and identifying signs’ of neurodivergence, as they are likely ‘missing the signs’. Most recently, SlavnyCross and others (2022) found that in around half of cases involving autistic defendants, the jury were not informed about the defendant’s autism or its potential impact; and that nearly 60% of prosecution advocates said or did something suggesting an inadequate understanding of autism. They concluded that ‘[t]here is an urgent need for… legal professionals to receive mandatory autism-awareness training’ and noted that ‘the impact for an autistic defendant of receiving legal counsel from an autism aware legal team may be far reaching’ – particularly in relation to effective communication and providing mitigating circumstances and arranging reasonable adjustments.

So, what does ‘good’ lawyering look like in this context; and how do we get to that position? Ideally, barristers will have at least basic awareness and knowledge of neurodivergence generally; be able to recognise potential signs of a neurodivergent defendant; and act as a form of ‘triage’, seeking support for working with their client and making appropriate adaptations. A key first step will be the ability to identify neurodivergence. General screening for neurodivergence in criminal justice systems is highly fragmented and incoherent (CJII 2021); the onus therefore currently falls on individual practitioners working with neurodivergent individuals to be alive to the possibility of vulnerability. This requires barristers to develop greater awareness and understanding of different types of neurodivergence; how this may present itself; and how

to adapt their approach. Suggestions for facilitating this might include mandatory training for barristers on neurodivergence (via regulators and representative bodies, such as the Criminal Bar Association); the provision of basic, accessible screening tools for advocates; and access to or signposting for referrals and additional assessment – it is important to highlight that barristers are lawyers not clinicians and should not be expected to become experts on neurodivergence (CJII, 2021).

The second step is for barristers to adapt to a neurodivergent defendant’s needs, both in terms of their personal interactions; and in representing them to others. With a defendant’s consent, the barrister could ensure that appropriate people (judges, tribunals, jurors) are aware of their client’s neurodivergence; how it presents; and what this means. They should seek, where appropriate, more time for a defendant to process and assess questions or requirements in proceedings. They could ensure, via Ground Rules Hearings, that all parties to proceedings are clear on the best approach to engaging with a neurodivergent individual in court (for example, using short, closed questions; providing additional time; having regular breaks – see The Advocate’s Gateway). They – where possible within the restrictive legislative framework – should request adjustments to standard court proceedings (for example, the use of video evidence); or ask the court to exercise its inherent discretion to allow support, such as an intermediary, sensory adjustments or aids to communication. Barristers should consider whether accessing external support and advice (such as expert evidence and family supporters) would be helpful (Allely, 2022). Where appropriate, barristers should proactively intervene to enable a neurodivergent defendant to manage proceedings (for example, by requesting revised questioning by opposing advocates); or to correct misleading assumptions about behaviour,

REFERENCES AND FURTHER INFORMATION

demeanour or language. Arguably, most of these adaptations are simple and low-cost, and will already be common practice in relation to some vulnerable defendants; but implementing them does depend on awareness, knowledge, communication, and collaboration between barristers and others.

Barristers cannot be stand-alone crusaders for fairness in the context of neurodivergent defendants. Alongside lawyers, the judiciary, police, and officials of courts, prisons and probation should all have adequate awareness and knowledge of neurodivergence. As a form of check and balance, all should be alive to issues in each other’s practice: a failure by the defence to highlight a defendant’s neurodivergence should not be left uncorrected if this is recognised by a prosecutor. Arguably, the judiciary should take the lead since they will be responsible for managing court proceedings. The CJS needs to have clear, cooperative communication; appropriate information sharing; and use of external expertise – currently areas which are not adequate. Criminal justice is a collaborative system involving many different individuals and interactions – change must therefore be systemic. However, as is often the case, the Bar can lead the way.

* Dr Tom Smith is Associate Professor in Law at the University of the West of England (UWE), Bristol; and Joint Co-ordinator of the Neurodivergence in Criminal Justice Network (NICJN).

Criminal Justice Joint Inspection Neurodiversity in the criminal justice system: a review of evidence, July 2021

‘You can’t judge a book by its cover: evolving professional responsibilities, liabilities and ‘judgecraft’ when a person has Asperger’s Syndrome’, Allely and Cooper, Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 68(1) 2017

‘Quantifying and exploring camouflaging in men and women with autism’, Lai, et al., Autism Aug; 21(6), 2017

‘Sensory processing in adults with autism spectrum disorders’, Crane et al 2009, Autism 2009 May;13(3)

Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Guidance on Interviewing Victims and Witnesses, and Guidance on Using Special Measures, Smith and Shaw, 2022

‘People should be allowed to do what they like: Autistic adults’ views and experiences of stimming’, Kapp et al, Autism 2019 Oct; 23(7) 2019

Autism and the criminal justice system: An analysis of 93 cases, Slavny-Cross and others, 2022

‘Brief Report: Autism in the Courtroom: Experiences of Legal Professionals and the Autism Community’, Maras and others, J Autism Dev Disord 2017 Aug;47(8)

Toolkits for advocates working with vulnerable witnesses and defendants are available on: www.theadvocatesgateway.org

‘Neurodivergence in the CJS and role of the Bar (1)’, by Dr Tom Smith, appeared in the October 2022 issue of Counsel

Issue:

November 2022 [1]

Related articles:

Neurodivergence in the CJS and the role of the Bar (1) [3]

Category: Justice Matters [4]

Finding a Lawyer - Equitable Briefing

Genevieve Hancock*

How does a client find a lawyer?

The answer is very different now compared to five or so years ago. Online searches are now key. Even if a client seeks a referral or a recommendation first, they will often use an online search to validate that referral1

At the same time, there is generally less visibility of women practitioners online compared to men, particularly outside of the large firms. Speaking from my own experience in assisting my clients to find lawyers in other practice areas, it can be incredibly hard to identify women practitioners in particular areas even when you know they are out there.

Equitable briefing is at the heart of what the Wellington Women Lawyers’ Association does. So, we came up with the idea of publishing a modern online directory of women lawyers. We engaged Richard Best, who has developed a number of online legal tools (https:// stoplookgo.co.nz/ and https://contractfoundry.co.nz/). Richard believed in the project so much that he did most of the work in his own time.

The “brief” (pun intended) was to focus on the user experience and produce a modern and engaging directory that would promote women lawyers and be a channel for instructions and appointments.

And voilà: meet https://womenlawyersdirectory.nz/, our wonderful new directory of women lawyers. It includes categories for sole practitioners, barristers, King’s Counsel, in-house counsel, lawyers at law firms, academics, and lawyers working in another field. It can be used to find a lawyer to appoint, brief or instruct or just to connect with colleagues. And best of all, it’s super appealing and easy to use. Users (and prospective clients) can filter by type of lawyer and/or practice area so they can instantly see the lawyers that meet their criteria.

As well as the obvious benefit – anyone searching the directory can see the women listed - adding a profile to the directory also increases traffic to the lawyer’s own website and enhances search engine optimisation

(SEO), helping rankings in online searches for that lawyer (or law firm)2. SEO is the foundation of digital marketing3

Feedback from in-house counsel is already hugely positive:

• “This is an excellent resource for finding experienced women lawyers and profiling their skills." (Jeremy Valentine, General Counsel and Chief Risk Officer, Chubb Insurance New Zealand)

• “This is a superb resource for anyone wanting to instruct a lawyer.” (Jason Woolley, General Counsel and Company Secretary, Meridian Energy)

• “This is a great initiative to boost the visibility and accessibility of women lawyers and their fantastic skills and expertise” (Larissa Vaughan, GM Regulatory Affairs and General Counsel, TSB Bank)

Any woman member of WWLA can upload a profile to the directory. We invite all members of the New Zealand Bar Association - Ngā Ahorangi Motuhake o te Ture to join WWLA and add a profile. We have a range of membership options and joining is easy: https:// www.wwla.org.nz/membership/. We have a number of members who are from out of town but do work or have other connections with Wellington.

We are also planning a series of networking events to support the directory, focussing on introducing women barristers and those in small firms to potential new corporate clients. You can sign up to our newsletter on our website (www.wwla.org.nz) to hear about these events.

Genevieve Hancock is the convenor of the Wellington Women Lawyers’ Association and a sole practitioner in Wellington focussing on commercial law, privacy, data and intellectual property in relation to technology. The Wellington Women Lawyers’ Association promotes the interests of women in the law, including providing scholarships to women law students in financial hardship, providing training and networking and mentoring.

REFERENCES

1See for example: https://www.clio.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019-Legal-Trends-Report.pdf, https://www.lawyer-monthly.com/2022/01/whatyour-clients-want-research-from-law-firm-marketing-club/ and https://www.clio.com/blog/how-do-clients-find-their-lawyers/ 2https://www.embroker.com/blog/how-to-get-clients-as-a-lawyer/ 3https://growlawfirm.com/blog/seo-for-lawyers-guide

Advanced Technology Drives New Drone and Video Based Forensic Services in NZ

AJ Thompson*

Two Nelson based companies, DroneMate and its sister business Precision Data Technology, are together bringing new technology to the courtroom and providing defense legal teams with leading-edge tools utilizing UAV (drone) based forensic analysis in conjunction with advanced video enhancement and analysis in a manner that is transforming cases and outcomes.

“Technology used effectively can revolutionize any field, and the legal environment is no different,” explains the companies’ Executive Director AJ Thompson. By combining aerially gathered imagery and 3D modelling we are able to use a process called photogrammetry, a sophisticated technique which brings images to life in three dimensions rather than solely relying on flat photographs. While 3D modelling is not new, it has previously required extensive manual labour and time-consuming computer work. “Our innovative methodology has created a rapid and very costeffective process for 3D model creation and its subsequent use for investigation and evidential purposes.”

By creating this digital twin of the crime scene which merges aerial and computer-based technologies into a unified package, DroneMate and Precision Data Technology are able to provide a solution which recreates the scene, makes precise measurements within the model, and is able to explore the environment from various vantage points.

One of the most significant challenges in crime scene investigation lies in presenting a comprehensive picture of an area in a way that leaves little room for interpretation. The digital model created using this technology provides a virtual tour of the crime scene and an experience remarkably close to a site visit, even within the confines of a courtroom and allows the findings to be presented in a manner that resonates with judges, juries, and experts alike.

In addition to this process, the companies have also developed new methods of video footage analysis and enhancement, particularly in how CCTV footage is utilised in criminal cases. The ever-evolving world of digital media produces a staggering array of file formats and sizes, creating a formidable challenge when trying to organize and present evidence even for the most competent videographers. “Our proprietary software process and our team’s skills allow us to transform a massive amount of recorded video footage into a coherent, easy to follow narrative which then allows us to seamlessly follow subjects across

multiple cameras and locations while capturing only the relevant details,” says PDT’s Technical Director Jonathan Lopardo. “In addition, we are then able to use AI-driven digital enhancement to uncover and highlight intricate details, especially in low-light settings where they might otherwise remain hidden.”

Experienced Nelson barrister Michael Vesty has worked with DroneMate and PDT in relation to several criminal matters before the courts in the last 12 months, with the company tasked with providing both aerial photography and videography of alleged crime scenes as well as CCTV footage analysis and enhancement. In one case, an element of the evidence presented by the prosecution centred on the privacy or otherwise of a particular location and the creation of the digital model was essential in analysing the scene both for trial preparation and during cross-examination in the trial itself.

In several other cases using CCTV footage, large amounts of video data from both a street scene and inside a nightclub were analysed and enhanced to isolate the process of events critical to the proceedings.

“The footage was a wonderful tool”, says Vesty. “It was engaging, kept people's attention, and helped me emphasise the points I was endeavouring to make. In the cases utilising CCTV data the enhancement of the footage provided me with an advantage in terms of my analysis of the relevant events. In one case, the enhancement was so compelling the footage was shared with the Crown with the result that the three co-defendants were discharged prior to trial.”

These new forensic services developed by the two companies are available nationwide and are proving that technology, when harnessed with skill and expertise can have a transformative effect on both the investigative process as well as the presentation of evidence in the trial itself and can provide an accurate, comprehensive and revealing view of events and locations otherwise unseen.

Additional information including a demonstration of some of the technology involved can be found on DroneMate’s website at https://www.dronemate.co.nz/forensicservices

* AJ Thompson is the Executive Director of Precision Data Technology and DroneMate Limited which offer NZBA members 10% off their products. Visit the NZBA Member benefits pages for information on how to access this discount.

Living Holistically Through Te Whare Tapa Whā

Daina Drosbie*

In our April 2021 issue of At the Bar we republished an article from the MAS members magazine OnMAS - Well in every way outlining Te Ware Tapa Whā – The Four Dimensions of Wellbeing a concept created by Sir Mason Durie (Rangitāne, Ngāti Kauwhata, Ngāti Raukawa). The article below (originally published by Peptalk and www.peptalkmedia.com via Aki, the MAS Wellbeing Portal), explains how this concept can be successfully incorporated into every day practice.

I was in my early 20’s and I had just started my primary teaching career. Some days I would wake up with that delightful feeling where I felt a spring in my step, the colours around me seemed brighter, I smiled often, and things just seemed to flow throughout my day. But more often it would be the opposite. I felt like I had woken up ‘on the wrong side of the bed’, many things felt like a battle, I was agitated by everything in sight and I couldn’t wait for the day to end. I knew something needed to change.

Luckily as a part of my teaching degree I was introduced to a simplified version of a Māori framework, Te Whare Tapa Whā - developed by Sir Mason Durie. This was my first introduction to holistic wellbeing.

Te whare tapa whā comprises of four pillars

• Taha Tinana - our physical wellbeing

• Taha Whanau - our family and social wellbeing

• Taha Hinengaro - our mental and emotional wellbeing

• Taha Wairua - our spiritual wellbeing

The framework is centred on the concept of being structurally sound. If we think of our Hauora/well-being like a whare/house, at the bottom we are built upon our land/roots, our four walls are made up of our Taha Tinana, Taha Whanau, Taha Hinengaro and Taha Wairua.

All four walls are necessary to establish strength and symmetry, and when they do, we are at our best.

As the world advances, I have noticed that many of us are so busy with our jobs or our children that we forget to stop and be aware of what actually helps us to maintain a strong sense of well-being.

In my early 20s, I used the Te Whare Tapa Whā framework. It helped me to look at myself through gentle eyes when I was struggling, and life just didn’t seem as bright as it used to. Fast forward 10 years, it is now a measure that always brings me back to feeling and being my best self.

When my taha tinana/physical wellbeing is strong:

• I am sleeping well.

• I am exercising consistently, not too intensely and my body recovers well from workouts.

• I eat a balanced diet of mainly whole foods and have limited cravings for less nutritional foods.

Taha Tinana relates to how well we look after our physical growth and development. Often if things aren’t going so well in our physical wellbeing it can be more obvious that something needs to change. From my experience success is achieved through just starting, along with consistency. Just trying something new has been a helpful tool to finding what works.

When my taha whanau/family and social wellbeing is strong:

• I feel happy and at peace.

• I feel a sense of belonging.

• The relationships around me feel easy and light.

• I am spending my time with people who lift me up.

Taha Whanau is the health of our family. Family can mean different things to different people. There’s that saying ‘friends are the family we choose for ourselves.’ Research shows that social connectedness is just as important for our health as eating nutritionally and exercising.

When my taha hinengaro/mental & emotional well-being is strong:

• I am eating and exercising in a balanced way.

• I wake up happy to start my day.

• I can face daily challenges with resilience.

• I am putting effort into my work, the relationship with myself, and others.

• I am more grateful for the things I have in life.

Often Taha Hinengaro is characterised as just our ‘mental health’. In my opinion, there is a lack of understanding about the term and the concept. I like to think of it as our mind, how it connects to our heart, our consciousness and our thoughts and feelings. It’s about how we think which is directly related to the way we feel, act and communicate. This is important for everyone to consider, whether we feel as though we have had experience with a mental illness or not. Often the way we deal with daily setbacks that are out of our control can be a measure of the strength of this pillar.

When my taha wairua/spiritual well-being is strong:

• I am journaling regularly.

• I feel a sense of purpose.

• I feel a sense of connection and belonging.

• I am more grateful for life’s lessons, even in adversity.

• I am actively setting goals and reflecting on my progress.

Taha Wairua is known as our ‘spiritual wellbeing.’ This pillar is our life force. It’s who we are, what drives us, and

a sense of purpose of where we’re going. It's different for everyone, and yes for some it may mean religion, for others it’s an internal connection-understanding ones values and beliefs, bringing about self-awareness and identity. Knowing who we are and having a sense of purpose are both directly related to our overall happiness.

Applying the 4 pillars of te whare tapa whā to build holistic wellbeing.

Over my 10-year journey in education, I have learned that it’s normal to come in and out of balance. Life is fast-paced and full of opportunities, attempting to keep up with it, and enjoy it, can often leave my Hauora a little depleted. Here are a few of my top tips to help to arrive back in alignment.

Taha Tinana/Physical Well-Being

• Joining a group exercise class.

• Cooking nutritious meals using minimally processed foods.

• Eating 2 servings of fruit and a minimum of 5 servings of vegetables each day.

• A walk in the sunshine.

• Turning my phone on aeroplane mode at 9pm to allow for a good sleep.

Taha Whanau/Family & Social Well-Being

• Cuddles from my nephews and niece.

• Sending a text to one of my family members or a friend I haven’t talked to in a long time.

• Organising a cup of tea with a friend.

• Attending a group exercise class.

Taha Hinengaro/ Mental & Emotional Well-Being

• Reading a book.

• Listening to my favourite songs.

• Meditation/breath practice-doesn’t have to be long, even 1-2 minutes but consistency gives me the best results.

• Writing.

• Journaling.

• Speaking up about my worries.

Taha Wairua/Spiritual Well-Being

• Setting goals and completing weekly reflections on my progress.

• Journaling.

• Connecting with people, being curious and asking questions.

• Time in nature by myself.

Te Whare Tapa Wha encourages a strengths-based approach to look at our holistic wellbeing.

The philosophy guides us towards being our best selves so we can manage daily stressors, overcome adversity and most importantly, live a beautiful and fulfilling life.

Insurance that puts you first

What does “good advice” look like?

Angela Chu*

Why some current systems may not work

The traditional financial advice model has been around for decades, but it is no longer effective in today's world. Many people are still struggling with their finances despite seeking help from financial advisors. The reason for this is that the current systems may not work as they are too focused on selling products and services rather than helping people achieve their financial goals.

One of the major problems with the current system is that financial advisors are often motivated by commissions. This means that they may recommend products or services that are not necessarily in their clients’ best interests, but rather what will earn them the most money. This conflict of interest can lead to a lack of trust between clients and advisors, which can ultimately harm the client's financial well-being.

Some current systems rely heavily on outdated technology and processes, which can make it difficult for advisors to provide personalised advice to clients. As a result, many people may feel they are not getting the attention or support they need to achieve their financial goals.

It's time for a change in how we approach financial advice. We need a system that prioritises the needs and goals of clients over anything else.

So, how can you make good financial decisions?

When it comes to achieving financial success, it all starts with defining your values and setting clear goals. Your values will serve as the foundation for your financial decisions and guide you towards making choices that align with your priorities. Once you have a clear understanding of what matters most to you, it's time to set achievable goals that will help you reach your desired financial outcomes.

Setting financial goals doesn't have to be a daunting task filled with complex technicalities. Simply having an idea of what you want to achieve financially is a great starting point. Whether it's saving for a down payment on a house, paying off debt, or building a retirement fund, having specific targets in mind will help keep you motivated and focused on taking the necessary steps towards achieving them.

Finding your "Why" is crucial when it comes to making wise financial decisions. It's the driving force that gives you a strong sense of purpose and motivation to save and invest for the long run. Without a clear

understanding of your "Why" it can be challenging to stick to a financial plan, especially when obstacles arise. Whatever your “Why” may be, having a clear sense of purpose will help you make smarter financial choices that align with your goals. So, take some time to reflect on what drives you and find your "Why" - it could make all the difference in achieving financial success.

Once you have your values and goals set, come up with a plan and invest accordingly. Planning plays a crucial part in this process. You'll need to formulate a plan of how you can achieve those goals. If you do this properly, you will have a strong understanding of where you are now and exactly where you are heading.

...and that’s it! Putting all the above on repeat will help you make good financial decisions for your goals over the long run.

However, in reality it’s not that easy…

Planning for the future is never an easy task. As much as we would like to have a clear and straightforward path towards our goals, life has a way of throwing curveballs that can disrupt even the most wellthought-out plans. From changes in personal circumstances to shifts in economic and political landscapes, there are countless factors that can impact our financial planning journey.

One of the biggest challenges in financial planning is dealing with change. Investment markets fluctuate, tax laws evolve, and our own attitudes towards risk can shift over time. This means, what worked for us

This article has been provided by member benefit partner and conference sponsor The Private Office.

yesterday may not be the best approach for tomorrow.

In other words, we are human, and our lives cannot be simply placed in a generic algorithm to achieve longterm goals. Unfortunately for us, life happens.

Then what does “good advice” look like?

Well, that’s where The Private Office comes in. We believe we have the perfect model in place to help work with our clients to achieve their long-term goals. Here’s how we do things differently.

empowering you with knowledge and understanding. We believe that by working together, we can create a plan and provide advice to take that step towards your goal.

The third and last bit is relationship. As mentioned above, investment markets change, tax rules change, legislations changes. Not only this, over the years your plans, goals and situation will change. By keeping a strong relationship and by keeping each other updated, we can ensure your money is always working towards achieving your plans.

We will make adjustments with these changes (to the plan, to the investments) but by keeping things under regular review we can ensure you remain on track to achieving your goals. The only risk a financial adviser should expose to their clients to is that of not achieving their financial objectives. All the rest is just noise.

We like to meet with our clients at least every 12 months to review their situation and goals, but most importantly to make sure you are on the right track.

Evidence-Based Investing

There are three fundamental areas to our role, and they're all important. Planning, advice, and relationship. They're all interlinked, and you are at the centre of all of them.

When it comes to achieving your financial objectives and goals, planning is the essential first step. It's about identifying where you are now, what you want to achieve, and creating a roadmap for how you're going to get there. At The Private Office, we understand that each client’s situation is unique, which is why we work closely with you to develop a personalised plan that addresses your specific needs and goals.

Our approach involves looking at your entire financial situation to gain a comprehensive understanding of where you stand. We then work collaboratively with you to create a plan that considers your current circumstances as well as any future changes or opportunities.

By working together on this planning stage, we can help ensure that you have a clear path towards achieving your financial objectives. Our goal is to help you make informed decisions about how best to allocate your resources to achieve the outcomes that matter most to you.

Doing this planning bit with you makes the advice bit much simpler. Our team takes the time to carefully evaluate your risk profile and determine what level of risk is necessary to achieve the returns you desire. When investment is needed, we research and analyse investment managers that follow a low-cost, diversified, evidencebased investment philosophy to manage money.

Ultimately, our goal is to simplify the advice process by

At The Private Office, we believe in evidence-based investing. This means we make decisions based on what has worked in the past. We don't try to time the market or guess which stocks will go up or down. Instead, we focus on investing in undervalued stocks that have a history of performing well over the long term.

Evidence-based investing is a proven way to build wealth over time. It's not a get-rich-quick scheme, but it is a reliable way to achieve your financial goals.

The key benefits of evidence-based investing include:

• More reliable than trying to time the market.

• Less risky than stock-picking.

• More cost-effective.

If you're looking for a way to invest your money that is based on sound market research and proven methods, then evidence-based investing is a good option for you. If you would like to enhance your investment experience and increase the likelihood of achieving your long-term financial aspirations, please feel free to get in touch with the team at The Private Office.

About the Author: Angela Chu (Financial Adviser)

A disclosure statement is available on request and free of charge.

Angela is a Client Director at The Private Office. She has spent nine years in the Finance and Banking industry of which she has spent eight years focusing on providing investment advice to high-networth clients and trusts.

Angela studied mathematics at University at the age of 15 and has a passion for crunching numbers and looking at data.

Angela was born and raised in New Zealand, and she often travels to Christchurch where she is originally from to visit friends and family.

Petrol

Heads’ Corner Jaguar F Pace-SVR

David O’Neill*

Duncan and Ebbett of Hamilton loaned me an F Pace–SVR to review. I have decided that given that petrol cars with enormous motors are definitely on the outer, I should drive as many as possible before they become outlawed.

You might think that I merely go out to indulge myself with driving nice cars. To a degree, you are correct, I do. By the same token, while I like driving nice cars and, as you may have already guessed, powerful cars, I do enjoy telling other people about these sorts of cars because most people never get an opportunity to check-drive lots of different vehicles to find out what they might or might not like.

I am also making a bit of a pig of myself on V8’s. V8’s will become a thing of the past one day and until that happens, I want to try and drive as many as I can. If cars aren’t your thing and the sound of a V8 rumble doesn’t reverberate in you, then you can still read about these cars and imagine getting one which might have a different sized motor in it, for example. You might even (quelle horreur!!) imagine it as an electric vehicle. It really comes down to whatever rocks your world or spins your wheels. For me, it’s driving a V8 powered car which

can handle well and looks a million bucks. For you, it might be a Nissan Leaf. It’s whatever takes your fancy.

The F Pace-SVR is one of those vehicles that not many people get to drive and it is probably out of the price range of a lot of people (but not you lot-that’s what I keep telling the suppliers of fine motor vehicles anyway), however, by the same token, if you really want to drive a car like this, then go out and try it, drive it, fall in love with it and buy it. Just remember, you will only have to work an extra 5 years to afford it……

This car didn’t have any plug in anything. No threepoint plugs. No electric motors (apart from the ones that drove the sunroof). It was the top-of-the-line F Pace.

The F Pace is an SUV. The SVR stands for Special Vehicle Ratings, created by the Special Vehicles Operations Group at Jaguar. The SVO division of Jaguar has created a car that is an SUV, with all the bells and whistles and can still go from 0-100 kms/ hour in 4.0 seconds flat.

Naturally enough I was tempted (and succumbed) to trying out the acceleration and it certainly is blisteringly quick when you put your foot down. In fact, the only thing that moves faster than the car is the petrol gauge when you put your foot down.

It’s an attractive looking vehicle. Mine was a bright blue colour. I can’t say it was my cup of tea but then again, I’m not buying it.

smooth stretch of tar seal, it's very comfortable.

The car doesn’t feel that long but it is. It’s 4.76 metres end to end and from one edge of one mirror to the other edge of the mirror on the opposite side of the car, it’s 2.1 metres wide.

The seats in the back fold down. The headrests are fixed so you have to have the front seats forward a bit to get it down completely, but the boot does absorb a lot of gear (we needed it).

It had a 5 litre V8 petrol engine with a supercharger. It puts out 405 kw and 700 nm of torque. To translate – that’s a ton of power and heaps of torque. Jaguar claim that its top speed is 286 kmh. I didn’t go therehonest.

The car that I drove, spec’d out completely, was $179,650. It came with a sliding glass roof, privacy glass, a roof blind, bigger wheels (22 inch) with suede cloth/leather seats. As you can imagine, it does all the things that it needs to do effortlessly. It is a lovely car to drive. It feels like a small car once you’re inside it, despite weighing 2.59 tonnes.

Once you get in it, you are confronted with touch screen everything and finding your way around that is a bit of an issue initially. The cabin was beautifully finished, covered in Alcantra and leather and some metal with little plastic on show.

My car had bright blue paintwork with black bonnet vents and very large air intakes on either side of the grill and black wheels with red callipers for the brakes.

The car comes with everything one would want. The list of standard features is incredibly long and there aren’t an awful lot of optional extras for the money. The seats are very comfortable. I found the ride quite harsh, but I suspect that is more to do with trying to make this into a sports SUV than anything else. We drove the road from Hamilton through to Pauanui, which goes via Paeroa, Waihi, Whangamata and then over the hill to Opoutere and Hikuai. The road is not in great shape. It’s been thrashed to death by all the heavy traffic and the weather. Because the car suspension is relatively hard it was a jarring sort of ride but when it’s on a

Like all cars in this category, the steering wheel delivers a number of functions. To be fair, you probably don’t have to take your finger off the wheel to just about do anything with the car. You can change stations, call somebody, change songs on your Apple CarPlay and even switch on the lane assist feature.

Jaguar have a history of sports cars (remember the E type) and, in my view, are trying to marry up a sports car type of vehicle with an SUV like this.

I think they have succeeded. The car is good looking, even for an SUV. It goes at a blistering pace, albeit consuming petrol like it’s going out of fashion and goes round corners pretty well. I confess we didn’t try that out too much because we were driving on the coast road, at night and it was wet. Suffice to say I took it easy.

It is difficult to compare this car with other SUV’s. It’s nothing like, for example, a Range Rover. A Range Rover to my way of thinking is aimed at a different market. This is a much sportier type of vehicle and is probably aimed at the person who wants the utility of an SUV but wants it to go really quickly. Buying this one will get you all of that. You’ve got a ton of space inside, enough room for five people (but four would fit better) and you can go to the dump and unload an awful big load of rubbish if you really wanted to.

If you like Jags, want an SUV and have got a lazy $180,000 floating around, then this car is for you.

O’Neill is a Hamilton barrister, who may never get over his first love – a petrol V8.

*David

Christchurch Silks Lunch

AWLA/NZBA Women at the Bar

Kellie Arthur and Maria Dew KC

Kellie Arthur, Angeet Singh, Julie-Anne Kincade KC and Maria Dew KC

From front left to front right Justice Anne Hinton, Stephanie Grieve KC, Kerryn Beaton KC, Lisa Preston KC, Judith Ablett-Kerr KC, John Burrows KC, Stuart Grieve KC, Peter Whiteside KC, Nigel Hampton KC, Hon. Nicholas Davidson KC, Her Hon. Judge Pru Steven KC, Len Anderson KC, Fiona Guy Kidd KC, Antonia Fisher KC, Sir William Young KNZM KC, Maria Dew KC, Nicholas Till KC

MARIA DEW KC – President

Ph +64 9 307 5251 maria@mariadew.co.nz

KELLIE ARTHUR

Ph +64 9 972 2052 kelliearthur@fortyeightshortland.co.nz

VICTORIA CASEY KC

Ph: +64 4 212 4679 victoria.casey@cliftonchambers.co.nz

PHILLIP CORNEGÉ

Ph +64 7 282 0572 Phillip@phillipcornege.com

GOWAN DUFF

Ph +64 27 2828 287 gowan@mataichambers.com

SIMON FOOTE KC

Ph: +64 9 307 8784 swbf@simonfoote.co.nz

FELIX GEIRINGER

Ph: +64 4 909 7297 felix@geiringer.law

TARYN GUDMANZ

Ph: +64 3 477 8781 taryn@princeschambers.net

GENEVIEVE HASZARD

Ph: +64 7 571 2447 genevieve@kennedychambers.co.nz

ISWARI JAYANANDAN

Ph: + 64 9 263 0047 iswarij@yahoo.co.nz

SAM JEFFS

Ph: + 64 9 973 0272 sam.jeffs@bankside.co.nz

STEPHEN LAYBURN

Ph: + 64 9 300 5485 stephen@stephenlayburn.co.nz

RICHARD MCGUIRE

Ph: +64 3 962 4241 richard.mcguire@pds.govt.nz

TIHO MIJATOV

Ph: +64 4 472 9027 tiho.mijatov@stoutstreet.co.nz

JAMES RAPLEY KC

Ph: +64 3 964 8000 jrr@bridgeside.co.nz

KINGI SNELGAR

Ph: +64 21 293 6520 Kingi.sneglar@gmail.com

ANNE TOOHEY

Ph: +64 3 260 3101 anne@annetoohey.com

MAGGIE WINTERSTEIN

Ph: +64 9 262 1126 m.winterstein@libertylaw.co.nz