Unsatisfactory conduct. Client claim struck out
This is a summary of a decision made by a Lawyers Standards Committee under the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006. This summary was published in LawTalk 746.
A lawyer, Mahendra Patel, was found guilty by a Standards Committee of unsatisfactory conduct after his lack of competence resulted in a substantial claim by his client being struck out. Mr Patel was censured and ordered to pay compensation to the client, a fine, and costs to the New Zealand Law Society.
The complainant had instructed Mr Patel to act for a trust in bringing an application for judicial review. The trust’s claim sought various remedies, including more than $18 million in damages. However, the claim was struck out after Mr Patel failed to file an amended Statement of Claim as ordered by the court. The court awarded $13,380 in costs against the plaintiff. The complaint against Mr Patel alleged lack of communication, lack of progress, inaccurate work and incompetence.
The judge had commented that the Statement of Claim Mr Patel had prepared was “hopelessly inadequate and requires, even if there is any appropriate cause of action, a complete re-draft”. The lawyer was apparently suffering serious health problems at the time. However, the Standards Committee found that Mr Patel’s file, when read in conjunction with the judge’s comments, made it clear he did not have the necessary experience and skill for this legal work, regardless of his health problems.
As well as censuring him for his unsatisfactory conduct, the Standards Committee ordered Mr Patel to compensate the client for the full amount of the costs awarded against it by the court. He was also fined $3,000 and ordered to pay $1,500 costs to the Law Society. The Standards Committee recommended that his name and the details of the case be published.