Judges decline to extend latest stay from 30 October 2026 to 29 January 2027
In a case involving a barrister and solicitor found guilty of misconduct under s 7 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (LCA), the New Zealand Supreme Court declined to extend the stay of his suspension to 29 January 2027.
The New Zealand Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal previously censured the applicant in Jindal v Auckland Standards Committee 1 [2026] NZSC 164. The tribunal imposed a six-month suspension starting on 22 May 2025 and made him pay compensation and costs.
On 22 October 2026, the Supreme Court denied the applicant’s request for leave to appeal against decisions of the High Court and the Court of Appeal arising from the disciplinary matter against him.
While its denial of the leave application should have ended the interim stay of the applicant’s suspension from his legal practice, the Supreme Court agreed to further stay the suspension until 6 p.m. on 30 October 2026.
According to the Supreme Court, this stay would give the applicant the time to make the appropriate practice arrangements.
The applicant applied to extend the stay until 6 p.m. on 29 January 2027 so that he could:
The Supreme Court declined this stay application.
According to the Supreme Court, it lacked jurisdiction to grant or extend a stay supporting the applicant’s proposed individual communication with the UNHRC. Even assuming it did have such jurisdiction, the Supreme Court saw no basis to exercise it.
The Supreme Court ruled that delaying the suspension once more would seriously go against the LCA’s objective of fostering public confidence in the delivery of legal services.
In reaching its conclusion, the Supreme Court noted that:
On 24 June 2026, the Supreme Court of New Zealand granted a short further continuation of a stay of the order imposing a six-month suspension on the applicant under ss 242(1)(e) and 244 of the LCA.
Before that, the Court of Appeal of New Zealand denied leave to appeal against a ruling of the High Court of New Zealand that affirmed the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal’s liability and penalty decisions.
Enjoy this story? Read the latest litigation and dispute resolution news on the main page!
