Lawyer to appeal against being struck off roll

Press, 2 April 1987, Page 2

Lawyer to appeal against being struck off roll

A Christchurch solicitor and former president of the New Zealand Party, Mr Malcolm James McDonald, plans to appeal against the decision to strike him off the roll of barristers and solicitors and order costs totalling $25,735. He said yesterday that his solicitor, Mr David Jones, planned to file an appeal to the High Court immediately. The New Zealand Law Practitioners’ Disciplinary Tribunal held at a hearing in Wellington that Mr McDonald had breached his fundamental duty as a solicitor. The tribunal’s chairman, Mr Ted Thomas, Q.C., said the case involved $339,000 being lent without security, although it was accepted there was no dishonesty involved. Mr McDonald was before the tribunal on 13 charges, and had admitted the facts, Mr Thomas said.

“He has pleaded guilty to misconduct in his professional capacity and to negligence or incompetence of such a degree or so frequent as. to reflect on his fitness to

practise as a barrister or solicitor or so as to tend to bring the profession into disrepute,” he said.

The tribunal decided Mr McDonald was “not a fit and proper person to practise as a barrister and solicitor” and ordered that his name be struck oft the roll. Mr McDonald, who has been a solicitor in Christchurch for about 10 years, was employed by the law firm of Dougall Stringer and Company until last year. His counsel, Mr Jones, told the tribunal Mr McDonald was part of an office system which was

“demonstrably poor.” The tribunal noted that the partners in the firm had not had a chance to comment on that claim. Mr Jones also emphasised that Mr McDonald was working under immense pressure, with an extremely heavy workload to the point where he was unable to copq.

He said Mr McDonald had apparently been a competent practitioner in all his other work, and for all clients other than Mr Richard Van den Bos, who is referred to in several of the charges before the tribunal. Nine charges refer to advances made by Mr McDonald from his firm’s nominee company to Mr Van den Bos. The tribunal noted that the pressure on Mr McDonald did not result in errors, omissions, or any signs of incompetence in other areas of his practice. “Reduced to its essential core, this is a case where $339,000 was lent without security,” Mr Thomas said.

In eight cases, there were loans with no mortgages prepared. In six

other cases the mortgages were not registered. Shortcomings or failures in any office system, or reliance placed on others, could not exonerate a practitioner from his basic responsibility to ensure that his clients* moneys were properly secured when they were lent out

“So . what was really in issue in these charges was Mr McDonald’s fundamental duty as a solicitor, and that has been breached,” said Mr Thomas. Mr McDonald was ordered to pay the Canterbury District Law Society $22,500 in costs, and $3235 to the New Zealand Law Society for the tribunal’s expenses. Mr Tony Hearn, Q.C., appeared for the Canterbury District Law Society.

Mr McDonald commented yesterday, “It was accepted by the tribunal that there was no dishonesty, nothing misleading, and no personal gain. “My procedural mistakes relate to part of the legal affairs of one client. “An appeal to the High Court is being filed immediately.”