Evgeny Orlov’s name will be removed from the Roll of Barristers and Solicitors, the New Zealand Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal states in  NZLCDT 16 following an agreed settlement between Mr Orlov and the New Zealand Law Society.
The settlement followed Mr Orlov applying to the Tribunal for a stay of proceedings on 16 out of a total of 18 charges he faced. The charges were of serial negligence or incompetence in relation to a number of proceedings in which he was counsel.
In its first decision on Mr Orlov’s stay application,  NZLCDT 3, the Tribunal noted that Mr Orlov “states repeatedly” that he does not wish to practise in New Zealand.
“Because he has no practising certificate and because he does not intend to practise again in New Zealand, Mr Orlov states that there is no public protective purpose in continuing the proceedings against him,” the Tribunal said.
Mr Orlov told the Tribunal that he would “agree to being removed from the Roll of Barristers and Solicitors. He would give an undertaking never to apply for a practising certificate again even though he does not consider himself guilty of the charges.”
The Tribunal said it considered that were Mr Orlov to be removed from the Roll of Barristers and Solicitors, “continuing the proceedings against him might well constitute an abuse of process. This would be particularly so if it involved an outcome whereby Mr Orlov was unnecessarily at risk for further costs orders in the region of $300,000 (by extension from the previous proceedings).”
In order to meet the New Zealand Law Society’s concerns about Mr Orlov’s future actions in possibly applying for reinstatement, the Tribunal ordered that the Law Society’s consent to both removal and reinstatement was on the following conditions:
- That prior to any reinstatement application Mr Orlov paid all outstanding Court-ordered or Tribunal-ordered costs awards against him.
- That the remaining 18 charges could be considered as part of any assessment of fitness to practice undertaken by the Law Society or any Tribunal or Court on appeal from that assessment before reinstatement was granted.
Following the agreed settlement, the Tribunal stayed proceedings relating to the 18 charges pending any further order from the Tribunal.