A senior lawyer at a major law firm who grabbed a junior colleague’s penis at a Christmas party and made other lewd comments about people he worked with has been suspended for 15 months. 

The man, who has interim name suppression, was drunk at two different parties run by his firm several years ago, where at the first he commented about employees’ genitalia and sex lives and touched staff inappropriately. 

At the second party weeks later, he spanked a woman with a piece of wood, kissed her on the top of the head and danced in a sexualised manner. 

The Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal described the man’s behaviour as “appalling and uncouth”. 

A hearing into the man’s conduct was held earlier this year, where several of the junior staff gave evidence that they had chosen to downplay how the behaviour affected them for fear of not getting hired for a permanent role. 

Now, the same tribunal has ordered the man to be suspended from practising as a lawyer and to pay a combined $73,000 in compensation and legal fees. 

The tribunal compared the man’s behaviour to inappropriate conduct by other lawyers it had penalised like James Gardner-Hopkins, Richard Dean Palmer and a Mr Q. 

Gardner-Hopkins was suspended for touching five interns inappropriately, also at a Christmas party. Palmer clocked a suspension for taking female interns to a sex shop and for a series of inappropriate emails, and Mr Q drunkenly offered a colleague “the best orgasm” of her life in a taxi ride home from a work event. 

The tribunal found that in this case, the man’s conduct was not strictly sexual or predatory, although his conduct had sexual elements to it. 

In comparing this case to Palmer, the tribunal said both cases involved “disregard for junior staff, and in both cases the junior staff were stressed and anxious as a result of the practitioner’s conduct…” and that this was “more invasive, humiliating and offensive than Mr Palmer’s conduct.” 

The tribunal said that the man could be described as “completely out of control.” 

‘What I think is funny, other people may not, I suppose’ 

Following the two incidents, the senior lawyer apologised to his affected colleagues, self-referred to a psychologist and reduced his alcohol intake significantly, before going sober altogether and is approaching four years of sobriety. 

In his affidavit to the tribunal earlier this year, the man described his conduct as a “joke gone too far” and that he hadn’t intended to offend anyone. 

“I’ve got a forthright sense of humour and can be provocative, and alcohol doesn’t help that,” he said. 

“What I think is funny, other people may not, I suppose.” 

The tribunal said the man’s sobriety was commendable, and it appeared he’d made a full commitment to discovering and dealing with the factors which led him to behave like he did. 

“We consider that [the lawyer’s] response has been significantly better than most other practitioners with whom we have dealt, who have had alcohol misuse problems,” the tribunal said in a decision released today. 

The tribunal said that because of this, it had opted to significantly reduce his period of suspension than he might have otherwise been handed. 

“This is because we consider that one of the purposes of suspension, namely the opportunity for rehabilitation, has largely been served.” 

“We are satisfied that he is, in the absence of intoxication, a skilful and solid lawyer and a considerate and supportive colleague and mentor.” 

The man’s name will continue to be suppressed to allow him time to appeal the decision. 

Jeremy Wilkinson is an Open Justice reporter based in Manawatū, covering courts and justice issues with an interest in tribunals. He has been a journalist for nearly a decade and has worked for NZME since 2022.