Council Brief - April 2015 - My Law Society
Transcription
Council Brief - April 2015 - My Law Society
Council Brief Wellington The monthly newspaper of the Wellington Branch New Zealand Law Society Issue 445 From the President THIS month’s edition of Council Brief continues our “thematic” approach arising from Wellington Branch’s strategic planning. We have been receiving excellent feedback on our March edition on emergency planning, and on Chris Ryan’s fascinating interviews with senior practitioners Bill Sheat (in February) and Melton Prosser (in March). This month’s theme is Continuing Professional Development. The results of CPD declarations are still coming in, and as of Friday 17 April, 94.4 percent of lawyers had made their CPD declaration. I understand this is a very good result based on international standards. There will be a preliminary review of the scheme later this year. This month we have a guest columnist, Aaron Martin, the Wellington Branch’s CPD Director and Council member. My grateful Guest Column … from Aaron Martin, Wellington Branch Council Member and CPD Director THIS edition of Council Brief marks the first full year of formal continuing professional development for New Zealand lawyers – and what a busy year it has been! There is so much going on in the Branch aimed at making it as easy as possible for our members to get their 10 hours of CPD each year, and to do so in a way that is meaningful for the career of each individual lawyer. CPD is not only about building the skills and knowledge of the profession as a whole. It is also a great reminder to think about our own development goals and ensure we are taking the time to learn new things and to keep ourselves current in the fast-changing world of modern legal practice. By 9 April 2015 every member should have completed a declaration of compliance with the CPD regulations for the last 12 months. The Branch has embraced a “no practitioner left behind” approach to CPD, with the CPD Working Group exploring the implementation of distance technology for some Branch offerings so practitioners in remote locations or unable to attend a session of special interest can still take part. Annette Black, the NZ Law Society consultant who estab- lished continuing legal education within NZLS (now NZLS CLE Ltd) 30 years ago, has played a big role in the introduction of the new CPD scheme. In this edition she provides an overview of the key themes and points to remember. Branch Vice President David Dunbar, Council member and barrister Felix Geiringer, and Young Lawyers Committee convenor Jelena Gligorijevic´, offer some different perspectives on page 3. As they would be the first to acknowledge, there will be as many different perspectives as there are lawyers. One size does not fit all when it comes to “lifelong learning”. The myriad lowcost, high-quality CPD offerings of Branch committees reflect this broad diversity of opportunities for personal and professional growth. We can attend and ask questions, enjoy the collegiality of the events, and we can put our hand up to present on a topic in our field of expertise. There is a challenge there for us all. ISSN 2382-2333 April 2015 An overview of the CPD scheme CPD highlighted in this edition thanks to everyone who contributed to this edition, and in particular the Branch’s CPD working group of Aaron Martin, David Dunbar, Wellington Vice President, Jelena Gligorijevic´, convenor of the Young Lawyers Committee, Felix Geiringer, Steph Dyhrberg, Annette Gray, Sue Barker and Philip McCabe. I would also like to pay tribute to Annette Black, who led the development and implementation of the CPD scheme. Annette is stepping down from her consultancy role with the Law Society. She retired from her fulltime role some years ago but has continued to oversee the implementation of CPD through its first year. Many of us will know Annette and that she is regarded internationally as a leader in the design and implementation of effective legal professional development programmes. In the New Year’s honours list she was awarded a New Zealand Order of Merit (ONZM) in recognition of her contribution to legal education. The profession has much to thank Annette for and we wish her all the best for her retirement. I commend Aaron’s column. INSIDE: Councilanalysis Brief Advertising3 CPD [email protected] Internet control 5 ‘Romance’ scams 7 Reynolds Advertising By Annette Black, NZLS Consultant T he Continuing Professional Development (CPD) rules require all lawyers to declare to the Law Society within five working days after the end of each CPD year that they have complied with CPD requirements. This year the final day was Thursday 9 April. If you haven’t completed your declaration by then it is a late declaration, and you should submit it as soon as possible. Continued failure to make a declaration may mean you will be audited and referred to the Lawyers’ Complaints Service. All declarations are made online. If you have completed your CPD requirements but have not yet made your CPD declaration, full directions are on the CPD webpage of the Law Society website – www.lawsociety.org.nz/cpd . CPD requirements To complete your CPD requirements you need to complete your CPD plan and record – your CPDPR (Continuing Professional Development Plan and Record) and the required hours of CPD activities – usually 10. Your CPDPR is your personalised professional development plan and includes your: • Learning needs • Action plan • Activities record • Reflections – outcomes – what you will do differently as a result of what you learned – future learning needs • Documentation verifying your attendance. CPD activities may be more varied than many lawyers realise. CPD hours may come from: • Participating in courses, seminars, training, oneto-one coaching and study groups • Lecturing, teaching , instructing – teachers and instructors may include reasonable preparation time • Writing law-related books/articles • Preparing and presenting certain submissions. They may include any topic you can demonstrate in your CPDPR may assist you to carry out your work as a lawyer including: • Knowledge of – the law – other relevant topics – other relevant disciplines – law and procedures in other countries • Legal skills • Personal and practice management skills • Ethics, professionalism and client care. But activities must: • Be verifiable • Provide for interaction/feedback • Be planned and structured with a stated purpose and outcomes • Be related to your individual identified learning needs • Not be part of your day-to-day work. If you are unsure about the requirements, the Law Society website contains a link to the CPD Rules, Guidelines to the Rules, examples and templates for doing your own CPDPR plan along with a 10 step guide. If you have completed more than 10 hours of CPD activities you can carry over up to five hours of CPD activities into the next CPD year—along with your CPDPR. Your CPDPR may be carried on seamlessly from one CPD year to the next, provided you quantify the CPD hours you have completed at the end of each CPD year. CPD records must be kept for three years. ❑ More articles on CPD on page 3 It’s not too late! LAWYERS who have not declared completion of their required CPD in the year to 31 March 2015 are still able to do so. Law Society Continuing Professional Development Manager Ken Trass says the vast majority of lawyers have engaged in their professional development, reflected on their learning and developed some next steps for their on-going professional development. There is still time, and provision in the rules, for the 5.6% who have not completed declarations to do so. Mr Trass says you must either file a late declaration or apply for and be granted a deferment. “Failure to do either may result in your being requested to submit your CPD Plan and Record for audit. Continued non-compliance may result in your being referred to the Lawyers’ Complaints Service.” Late declarations may be made online in the Law Society Registry in the same way as those which were completed on time. Outstanding declarations in Wellington amount to 5.4 percent as at Friday 17 April. Around one third of these are barristers and nearly 70 percent male practitioners. ☛ Annual General Meeting NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Annual General Meeting of the Wellington Branch, New Zealand Law Society, will be held on Level 8, New Zealand Law Society Building, 26 Waring Taylor Street, Wellington on Wednesday 24 June 2015 at 4.00pm Nominations are called for the following positions: President (1) Vice President (2) Council member (up to 10) Only original nominations completed on the correct form and received in the Branch Office by 4pm on Friday 22 May 2015 will be accepted – electronic copies are not acceptable. Nomination forms are available to download at: http://my.lawsociety.org.nz/branches/wellington/documents/ Combined-Nomination-form-and-Notice-of-AGM.pdf Completed nomination forms should be sent by post to: The Manager Wellington Branch NZLS PO Box 494, Wellington Or delivered to: The Manager Wellington Branch NZLS Level 3, 26 Waring Taylor Street, Wellington Full details of the process for making CPD declarations can be found at: http://www.lawsociety.org.nz/for-lawyers/regulatory-requirements/ continuing-professional-development 2 Branch News COUNCIL BRIEF, APRIL 2015 Library News Useful tips on asking for / delegating legal research By Robin Anderson Wellington Branch Librarian (From Slaw.ca – thanks to John DiGilio) WHEN delegating legal research tasks, remember to: • share the facts that lead to the question (or tell someone where they can find the story of the file), • relay expectations, including: o time lines, o search cost restrictions, o volume of answer required (do you want a search from Magna Carta forward or the last 6 months of case law?), o explain what you already know OR do not want them to spend time on, o clarify how you are going to use the research output (send to a judge may mean different language/citation style than send to a client), o be specific about format requirements (a hyperlink to an online case or a Word version of a case with highlighting for colour printing or a pdf to file with the court). • if you want the research to be approached from a specific direction, make that clear, • seek confirmation that instructions are understood and follow up. Remember that with asking/delegating research questions, the more information you give, the better the result you will receive. Bestcase – Canadian databases – New Search interface The Library subscribes to the Bestcase suite of Canadian legal databases. These are available in the research libraries in Auckland, Wellington and Canterbury plus the Otago Library. The suite includes the Dominion Law Reports and Canadian Criminal Cases in full as well as summaries of decisions from a variety of sources. There are also pdfs of law reports. The new search interface is Westlaw Next from Canada and it is much easier to use. Westlaw NZ databases in the branch libraries If you are using or trying to use Westlaw NZ databases on branch library computers and you find that it is not working, or very slow, you can still use the old Brookers Online platform for a while longer. We are working with Thomson Reuters to rectify any problems with Westlaw access and speed as fast as we can. Wellington Branch Diary April-May Friday 24 April Women in Law Committee Tuesday 28 April Health Law Committee Wednesday 29 April Legal Assistance Committee Thursday 30 April Employment Law Committee Immigration Law Committee Friday 1 May Memorial sitting of Court of Appeal for Sir Ivor Richardson, 2.30pm Education Law Intensive, NZLS CLE, 6.5 CPD Hrs Wednesday 6 May Insurance – New Challenges, NZLS CLE Seminar, 1-5pm 3.5 CPD Hours (Webinar 9.30-11.30am 2 CPD Hrs) Friday 8 May IT & Online Law Conference, NZLS CLE Conference, 7 CPD Hours Monday 11 May Managing Information Flow, NZLS CLE Webinar 1 CPD Hr Wednesday 13 May Employment Law Practitioners’ Dinner, Juniper Restaurant Thursday 14 May Courts Committee Friday 15 May Criminal Law Committee Monday 18 May Employment Fundamentals – Managing the Relationship, NZLS CLE Webinar 1 CPD Hr Monday-Tuesday 18-19 May Introduction to Company Law, NZLS CLE Entry Level Programme 13 CPD Hrs Tuesday 19 May Family Law Committee Tuesday-Wednesday 19-20 May Lawyer as Negotiator, NZLS CLE Workshop 11.5 CPD Hrs New books at Wellington Branch NZLS Library Archbold : criminal pleading, evidence and practice London : Sweet & Maxwell 2015 KM570.A1 ARC Bowstead and Reynolds on agency London : Sweet & Maxwell 20th ed 2014 KN25.A1 BOW CPD top up day : Auckland - February 2015 Wellington : New Zealand Law Society 2015 KL148.46 NEW CPD top up day : Christchurch - February 2015 Wellington : New Zealand Law Society 2015 KL148.46 NEW CPD top up day : Wellington - general practitioner - February 2015 Wellington : New Zealand Law Society 2015 KL148.46 NEW Criminal law : working with intellectually disabled clients Wellington : New Zealand Law Society 2015 KM507.Q52.L1 NEW Disclosure of documents in civil litigation Wellington : New Zealand Law Society 2015 KN386.L1 NEW Law of costs Chatswood, NSW : LexisNexis Butterworths 3rd ed 2013 KN397.K1 DAL Mann’s annotated Insurance Contracts Act Pyrmont NSW: Lawbook Co 6th ed 2014 KN290.3.K1.Z14 MAN Mediation : skills and strategies (NZ edition) Sydney : LexisNexis 2015 KN398.4.L1 BOU Proceeds of crime law in New Zealand Wellington : LexisNexis NZ Ltd ,2015 KM594.6.L1 MCK R v Milat: a case study in cross-examination Sydney : LexisNexis Australia 2014 KN391.3.K1 HOW Sale and purchase of apartments : what’s trending now? Wellington : New Zealand Law Society 2015 KN74.L1 NEW Snell’s equity London : Sweet & Maxwell 33rd ed 2015 KN200.A1 SNE Social media and the law LexisNexis : Sydney, Australia 2014 KN347.46.K1 SOC The law emprynted and Englysshed: the printing press as an agent of change in law and legal culture 1475-1642 Oxford: Hart Publishing 2015 KL401.A1 HAR Trusts for company and commercial lawyers Wellington : New Zealand Law Society 2015 KN210.L1 NEW Winfield and Jolowicz on tort London : Sweet & Maxwell 19th ed 2014 KN30.A1 WIN Crossword Solutions From page 7 Cryptic Solutions Across: 1 Reductions; 7 Ionic; 8 Lighten; 10 Sweeping; 11 Fort; 13 Casket; 15 Ticker; 17 Iran; 18 Optional; 21 Notable; 22 Irons; 23 Pestilence. Down: 1 Range; 2 Decipher; 3 Colony; 4 Iago; 5 Network; 6 Dissection; 9 Naturalist; 12 Division; 14 Seattle; 16 Appeal; 19 Noose; 20 Abet. Quick Solutions Across: 1 Preference; 7 Eject; 8 Plainer; 10 Exterior; 11 Less; 13 Tussle; 15 Portal; 17 Beer; 18 Prospect; 21 Express; 22 Bravo; 23 Despondent. Down: 1 Pleat; 2 Entirely; 3 Employ; 4 Elan; 5 Consent; 6 Detestable; 9 Resolution; 12 Possible; 14 Steeple; 16 Prison; 19 Exact; 20 Deep. MA DESIGN m Answers for puzzles from page 7 Monday 25 May Evidence – Hostile & Difficult Witnesses, NZLS CLE Webinar 1 CPD Hr 1 (a)the letter “s” (b)‘incorrectly’ is always spelled i-n-c-o-r-r-e-c-t-l-y (c)NOON (d)the letters ‘e’ and ‘u’ only appear once in the word ‘millennium’ and, according to the OED, ‘eu-’ means easily or well (e)typewriter Wednesday 27 May Legal Assistance Committee Judicial Review, NZLS CLE Seminar 1-5pm, 3.5 CPD Hrs (Webinar 9.30-11.30am 2 CPD Hrs) Elder Law Intensive, NZLS CLE Seminar 9am-5.15pm 6.5 CPD Hrs 2 1…Qg4+ 2 Kf2 (if 2 Kh1 then 2…Qf3+ 3 Kg1 {if 3 Rg2 then 3…QxRg2#} 3…Qf1#) 2…Qg7+ 3 Ke1 Qf1# [Vidmar v Nimzovich New York 1927] Wednesday 20 May Wellington Branch Council meeting Thursday 21 May FATCA – Implications for Law Firms and Clients, NZLS CLE Webinar 1.5 CPD Hrs Immigration Law Committee Thursday 28 May Human Rights Committee Friday 29 May Women in Law Committee Deadline May Council Brief Monday 11 May Gary Born – the world’s preeminent authority on international commercial arbitration and international litigation, and renowned author - will hold the New Zealand Centre for International Economic Law’s (NZCIEL) Inaugural Senior Visiting Research Fellowship. Public discussion forums with Gary Born: The Rainbow Warrior– A Game Changer? A 30 Year Retrospective – Monday 4 May 2015, 5.30pm – 7.00pm, GBLT1, Victoria University Faculty of Law, 55 Lambton Quay. Gary Born acted as counsel for Greenpeace in the Greenpeace v France arbitration. Public forum on a Bilateral Arbitration Treaty Regime – Tuesday 5 May 2015, 6pm-7.00pm, Salmond Room, GB219, Level 2, Victoria University Faculty of Law, 55 Lambton Quay The Honourable Rex Mason Prize 2014 The Wellington Branch of the New Zealand Law Society as Trustee of the Honourable Rex Mason Trust advises that it will be accepting submissions for the Honourable Rex Mason Prizes for excellence in legal writing from 6 April to 26 June 2015. To be eligible for selection for the award, submissions must have been: • published in a New Zealand legal publication • between 1 January and 31 December 2014 The Trust Deed stipulates that “in determining the best articles the judges shall be guided by: i. the educational value of each article ii. the literary value of each article iii. the ability of each article to stimulate awareness in young lawyers of the nature and function of law as seen in and derived from practical experience iv. the extent to which each article draws attention to the need for development of law in times of social change v. the extent to which each article stimulates the interest of practising members of the legal profession” Submissions for the prizes should be sent on the official entry form to: The Manager Wellington Branch New Zealand Law Society PO Box 494 Wellington 6145 or delivered to: Level 3 NZLS Building 26 Waring Taylor Street Wellington 6011 and include the following: (described more fully in the Official Entry Form) 1. the full name/s of the author/authors 2. the full text of the article in hard copy 3. the date on which it was published 4. the publication in which it was published 5. an account of how the article to be submitted matches the criteria set out in the Trust Deed. All entries must be accompanied by the official entry form. Download from: http://my.lawsociety.org.nz/branches/wellington/documents/OfficialEntry-Form.docx Conferences April 28-29 2015 – NZ Building and Construction Law, Auckland. www.conferenz.co.nz April 30 2015 – The Maritime Law Association of Australia and NZ Conference, Taupo. www.mlaanz.org May 4 2015 – The Rainbow Warrior – a game changer? NZ Centre for International Law, Vic Law School 5.30pm. www.victoria.ac.nz/law/ about/events May 8 2015 – IT & Online Law Conference, Wellington. www.lawyerseducation.co.nz May 14-15 2015 – 13th Annual Immigration Law Conference, Auckland. www.cchlearning.co.nz May 21-22 2015 – CLANZ Conference, Mahi Tahi: Working Together, Bay of Islands. www.clanzconference.org.nz June 10-11 2015 – Mastering Due Diligence, Auckland. www.conferenz.co.nz June 17-18 2015 – Financial Markets Law, Auckland. www.conferenz.co.nz June 25-26 2015 – Trusts Conference, Wellington. www.lawyerseducation.co.nz June 25-28 2015 – Australasian Association of Bioethics and Health Law Conference, Wellington. www.events4you.co.nz July 13-14 2015 – Youth Advocates and Lay Advocates Conference, Auckland. www.lawyerseducation.co.nz July 23 2015 – AMINZ Conference 2015, Wellington. www.aminz.org.nz July 23-24 2015 – Competition Matters 2015; Competition & Regulation Conference, Te Papa. Commerce Commission. www.comcom.govt.nz August 17-18 2015 – Legal Executives Conference, InterContinental Hotel, Wellington. www.nzile.org.nz September 3-4 2015 – Aotearoa Conference on Therapeutic Jurisrudence, University of Auckland. http://tjaotearoa.org.nz September 3-5 2015 – Banking & Financial Services Law Association (BFSLA) Conference, Brisbane. http://bfsla.org September 6-9 2015 – Succession Law, Monash University Campus, Prato (20 mins from Florence), Italy. European Legal Conferences. www.europeanlegalconferences.com.au September 10-11 2015 – NZ Insurance Law Assn. Auckland www.nzila.org/conference September 13-18 2015 – Commonwealth Judges’ and Magistrates’ Association (CMJA) Triennial Conference, ‘Independent Judiciaries, Diverse Societies’, Wellington, NZ. www.cmja.org September 24-26 2015 – Resource Management Law Association (RMLA), Tauranga. www.rmla.org.nz CPD COUNCIL BRIEF, APRIL 2015 3 CPD – ‘The challenge is … the options and opportunity not the hours’ By David Dunbar, Wellington Branch Vice President F or many, myself included, the first full year of the Law Society’s CPD requirements will have been a period of experimentation and iteration. For most, it will have been a question, not of how to find the required hours, but what form our CPD will take. And, in reality, that is as it has always been; for lawyers who have recognised the value of CPD in their career, and for those employers who have valued that development in their staff. What is new, is the obligation (and opportunity) to create a CPD Plan and Record (CPDPR), and the requirement to take time to think about your professional development; reflecting on what we have learned, and on what comes next. Whatever form your CPDPR takes (and there are many on offer), pick a model that allows for iterative changes as your learning needs and professional aspirations evolve. In this edition of Council Brief, Annette Black reminds us of the rules, and those first declarations. Don’t forget, however, while the rules apply to us all, the choice of CPD is very personal. The challenge for us is not to let the regulatory minimum become a de facto maximum – and to target the options and opportunity, not the hours. For myself, the strategies to maximise the opportunities include the following. est us. And there is no denying the value of maintaining currency in our preferred areas of law or expertise. But let’s not be afraid to take a wider view and challenge ourselves in areas where we’re less comfortable, or to look not just at knowledge but more broadly at skills. Much CPD now on offer explores our broader skills and competencies and the challenges of law (examples including legal project management and leadership of, or within, a legal team). Testing options, and allowing for change Our choice of CPD will generally reflect our current position, career choices and interests, as it certainly is in my case . However, another view of CPD is that, having formalised CPDPR targets, it allows an opportunity to test areas of interest and inform future career choices. Take account of where we are Let’s talk to our employers. Recognise the link between our CDPDR and our employer’s targets. After all, our employer swill often be paying! More than that, the CPD rules allow and encourage that alignment, and our employers will see the benefit of maximising that. Take a longer view Jelena Gligorijevi´c, in her commentary below, notes the challenges and pressures faced for those new to legal practice, including answering the question; “what next”? Young lawyers are not alone in this. Many employers will be looking for evidence of an applicant’s ability to acquire new skills, and for broader knowledge that can be applied to new areas of practice. Our CPDPR can usefully prompt thinking, planning and preparation for the next step as we identify professional Manage breaks in practice For example, do you plan a family? Those who have done, will note the reduced requirements for those who have taken breaks in their career, but that does not mean your CPD need to be paused or your CPDPR put on hold. For employed lawyers, committed to returning to practice, or those facing a period away from practice, the CPDPR allows an opportunity to consider ways to bridge the gap, providing for a planned re-entry to practice. This could well be done in discussion with an employer, who one hopes would see the value of seamless resumption. This may be one time when peer review meetings come to the fore; if not for the CPD hours but the peer contact and maintenance of currency. This raises the question: what is on offer to support practitioners returning to practice after a break of a year or two? Be flexible and think broadly Setting stretch targets It is easy to identify courses that reflect the things that inter- development goals and activities that move from immediate priorities to transferable and marketable skills and competencies. “Let’s not be afraid to take a wider view and challenge ourselves in areas where we’re less comfortable, or to look not just at knowledge but more broadly at skills…” London perspective on CPD What is it we do as lawyers? In reality, our practice is not just “black letter” law. It’s advocacy, relationship building, creating rapport, helping others find solutions, managing a business, and much more. As we settle into areas of choice, where there is perhaps limited opportunity to expand subject area knowledge, let’s ask ourselves what other personal objectives might add value to our practice. Are you as technologically savvy as you By Felix Geiringer A s part of Council Brief marking the end of the first CPD year, I was asked to repeat an observation I made at last year’s Branch AGM. It related to experiences while working in London, where some young practitioners had turned the CPD requirements into a marketing opportunity. While I was there, the CPD requirements in England were very similar to the ones adopted in New Zealand last year. However, the CPD in that jurisdiction is in the process of major reform. Competition for a place in chambers in London is fierce. Getting a pupillage (a trainee position) is hard, and most pupils are not offered a place as a fully qualified barrister. A major factor in making that last leap can be to show that you are capable of building your own practice and bringing new work to chambers – not easy after only a year. When I started my pupillage, my pupil master told me that the CPD requirements presented a great opportunity in this regard. He encouraged me to prepare a seminar and to offer to deliver it to some of the solicitor firms. The law moves quickly. This is the reason we have CPD. It also means that there are constant new developments with which new practitioners, with a little effort, can make themselves familiar before they are generally known or understood. This could come, for example, from a significant court decision or a new piece of legislation. In 2014, there were 30 NZSC decisions that the Court thought significant enough to accompany with an explanatory media release. There were 42 amendment acts and 33 new principal acts. My pupil master’s suggestion was to familiarise myself with a recent development in an area of law that interested me. Having done so, I could then offer to deliver seminars explaining the same development to others. The solicitor firms welcomed such offers. It helped them keep their lawyers upto-date, and it gave them a free CPD hour. For me, delivering the seminar also qualified for an hour’s CPD. More importantly, the seminar was an opportunity to show the solicitors that I had a good understanding of that area of the law and the skills to explain it to others, including the courts on behalf of their clients. I met several young barristers who had followed this advice in London. They had all used it to great success. Before their peers, they had solicitors seeking to instruct them by name, and they were obvious choices for tenancy (a place in chambers). New Zealand does not have the same dynamic between chambers and firms. Nevertheless, our CPD presents young practitioners with a similar opportunity. Smaller firms should welcome well prepared seminars on new developments. Many conferences and workshops organisers will also welcome offers of contributions from younger practitioners. Delivering such seminars is also a good way of showing people in this jurisdiction that you know your stuff. could be? Is your client base coming from an increasingly diverse ethnic mix, where some additional language skills might assist? Are you really as good an advocate or manager of difficult clients as you like to think? Target opportunities to instruct and inform others Felix Geiringer, in his comments below, notes the advice he got in his pupillage to offer seminars. He rightly notes that the law moves quickly and that efforts to make yourself familiar with new areas of law – and to share that knowledge – will be rewarding. That can be a target for each of us, as new and not so new lawyers. A challenge and opportunity exists for us all; to senior practitioners – not just the pupil practitioner – to look to opportunities to share specialist knowledge with those less senior. For myself, having to explain to others or simply getting discussion going about health-related regulation, works two ways. Whatever others learn in the process (and I hope I achieve that), my own knowledge and sense of what I do, and why, is sharpened and reinforced every time. I hope that I always remain willing to share what I know, just as I have always found those senior colleagues I’ve approached willing to share and instruct. I guess that’s what it is, to be a profession… ‘… building quality legal careers’ – CPD for Young Lawyers By Jelena Gligorijevi´c T he first year of CPD has been a positive one for young lawyers in particular. The CPD programme has given young lawyers the opportunity to consider the broader competencies involved in legal practice, which might not always be top in mind during the period of transitioning from study to profession, and settling into a new job. It is well-known that working in the law can be tough and demanding at the best of times – the point is to make sure this does not dilute the satisfaction lawyers get from their work, and that the difficulties do not put them off a career in the law. New entrants to the profession are probably most prone to feel this pressure, and that is why it is crucial that young lawyers maintain an awareness of, and continue to think about and discuss, wider issues to ensure they are able to gain a sense of stability now, as well as the confidence that they can progress their careers in the future. The breadth of the CPD programme has allowed young lawyers to consider issues around ethics, work-related stress, time management and professional expectations. It has also provided a means for young lawyers to look at unfamiliar areas of the law, or look more deeply into their own specialisations, with the aim of increasing their knowledge and skills in the law. The Young Lawyers’ Committee’s own panel discussion event on applying the rule of law to today’s information culture (to be held in May) will itself be CPD compatible. The additional resource that CPD offers enables young lawyers to have a longer-term perspective on their careers and their future planning. We hope that the CPD programme continues to provide a necessary platform for building quality legal careers. 4 Admissions COUNCIL BRIEF, APRIL 2015 Admittee Kimberley Foo with Nyap Foo, Rosalene Foo and Wellington Branch President Nerissa Barber. Admittee Luana D’Appollonio (middle) from Brazil with Tanja Gantar and moving counsel Katie Bhreatnach. Laura Lincoln (left) with her moving counsel Lauren Brazier. Admittee Tracy Anne Finlayson (right) with moving counsel Heather Sharpes, and Keith and Susan Finlayson. Admittee Nicci Coffey from MPI and her moving counsel Peter Cranney of Oakley Moran. Admittee Erandi Rangauwa with parents Jay and Siri Rangauwa. Admittee Anita Van Der Loo, second from right, with her moving counsel Gracey Campbell, middle, Nick and Lee-Ann Van Der Loo and John Gutsell. Admittee Sally West, middle, with Nickie West, Cheryl West, Bruce West and Matt Winter. These pictures were taken at the Wellington Branch social function held on 27 March at the Wellesley to welcome newly admitted members and their families to the legal profession. Admittee Jessica Brown, middle, with Adrian Brown, Kevin Burns, Joyce Brown and Matthew Brown. Candidates admitted to the Bar on 27 March 2015 Luana D’Appollonio Kimberley Cui Yi Foo Daniel William Hunt Laura Emer Maire McCaffery Edda Marie Bacalla Mijares Megan Frances Young Sally Anne Newsham West Edgardo Jr. Peregrino Atienza Jessica Ashleigh Brown Josephine Margaret Byrnes Max Lawrence Clarke-Parker William Dominic Culas Michael Charles Barron Dickson Sarah Louise Gwynn Diana Rocio Johnson Rachael Margaret-Anne Jones Andrew Steven Tsin-on Lee Kurt Peter McRedmond Rachel Alice Murdoch Erandi Hasanthika Kumarihamy Rangamuwa James Daniel Tait-Jamieson Olivia Josephine Johanna Moana Bouchier Thomas Joseph Bailey Buchanan Charlotte Averill Christmas Anna Fabian Devathasan Caleb Stephen Green Cameron Russell Gubb Yemo Guo Shang Chin Lai Laura Mary Lincoln Caleb Dynes McConnell Jennifer Thiyaporn Sangaroonthong Matthew Edward Skinner Cara Betty Sweeetapple Telea Anita Magaret Van Der Loo Tracy Anne Finlayson Kathryn Fiona Gaskell Beau Hourigan-Johnston Stacey Robyn Hyland James Christopher Kane Barnaby Joseph Locke Nichola Rachel Coffey Page Kapil Patel Oliver Stephen Peacock Jonathan Keith Rowe Andrew Thomas Spencer Philip James Le-Neve Arnold Admittee William Culas, left, originally admiitted in Kuala Lumpur in 1997, with Sandra Dawkes, Alun Loo and Fang Sin Loo. The Solicitors’ Benevolent Fund – ways to donate Donations to the Solicitors Benevolent Fund can be made through: • “Give a Little” http://www.givealittle.co.nz/org/Solicitors, which will be automatically receipted, or • by Direct debit: Bank of New Zealand: 02-0506-0101108-097 All donations go directly to the capital reserve. The Solicitors’ Benevolent Fund Trust is registered as a charitable trust (number CC48709) and has tax deductible status. If a receipt is required when making a direct debit, please email [email protected] with your name, the amount deposited and a contact number to ensure a receipt is issued and sent to the correct place. Politics of the Internet COUNCIL BRIEF, APRIL 2015 5 Report from Busan The fate of the Internet – who is in control? Peter Dengate Thrush, former chairman of the board of ICANN, is a Wellington barrister specialising in Internet law. He attended the International Telecommunications Union’s Plenipotentiary Conference in Busan in November 2014, as an industry member of the New Zealand government’s delegation. This is his report on Internet-related aspects of that meeting. I n December 2012 an unprecedented failure of international diplomacy saw a major telecommunications treaty negotiation fail. The World Conference on International Communications (WCIT) was convened by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), and met in Dubai. The primary agenda item was the first review since 1988 of the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs). The ITRs are described by the ITU as “…binding global treaty designed to facilitate international interconnection and interoperability of information and communication services…” By the end of the meeting, New Zealand, along with more than 80 countries as diverse as the USA, Japan, Denmark, Chile, Kenya and Australia had been unable to sign on to the proposed new regulations. The reason was the attempt by the ITU to introduce Treaty regulations affecting the Internet. The ITRs were developed before the global spread of the Internet, which expanded in the 1990s driven by the adoption of its two “killer apps” – email and the world wide web. The US-based origins of the Internet are reasonably well known. US researchers were early leaders on packet-switched networks in the 1960s, and the ARPANET, an early precursor of the Internet, was developed as a defence project. Robert Kahn, and Vint Cerf developed the “internetting” protocol TCP/IP in 1973, which became the standard technology, with widespread adoption allowing the creation of the global Internet. As a result, Internet infrastructure and protocols were not brought into the mainstream of telecommunication standards, typically overseen by governments, often as national monopolies. In the USA, telecommunication was largely in private hands, so private sector solutions were developed for the Internet. Internet technical standards are set by the Internet Engineering Task Force, an ad hoc, open meritocracy of engineers. In 1998 the global Internet community, in response to a call from the US government, set up the Internet Corporation of Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to manage the allocation and deployment of critical Internet resources (primarily domain names and IP addresses) and to coordinate the development of Internet-related policies. None of this pleased the ITU. The ITU is the UN’s oldest agency. It was created in Paris in 1865 as the International Telegraph Union, changing its name in 1934 and becoming a part of the UN in 1947. It has 193 States (countries) as members, represented by their governments. While it has developed international standards on such telecommunications issues as wifi and satellite broadcasting, it has had no role in relation to Internet standards, or Internet resources. The ITU has been interested in having an Internet-related role for some time. Many of its members do not appreciate the lack of governmental veto in relation to aspects of Internet polices. Some members do not see ready access and the free flow of information as a benefit to their citizens. In return, those involved in Internet governance saw the ITU as old fashioned, with slow, dated processes, inherently unsuited to the Internet. ICANN pioneered instead what is known as “multistakeholder” processes, involving all those affected by a policy in its making, becoming the first global body to manage an international resource this way and having governments in an advisory role. This approach has been consistently supported by the New Zealand government for 16 years, in concert with over 150 other governments. Peter Dengate Thrush pictured with ITU secretarygeneral Dr Hamadoun Touré at Busan last November. When Peter became chair of ICANN in 2007 he began a process of rapprochement between ICANN and the ITU, working towards international consensus on issues surrounding the control of the Internet. Despite assurances from its SecretaryGeneral, Dr. Hamadoun Toure, to the contrary, there were concerns leading up to the Dubai meeting that the ITU would attempt to insert itself into Internet-related policy making. Leaks from members prior to the meeting didn’t help: Russian President, Mr. Putin was reported as saying to Dr Touré: “We are thankful to you for the ideas that you have proposed for discussion. One of them is establishing international control over the Internet using the monitoring and supervisory capabilities of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU).” At the Dubai meeting, members did try to insert clauses into the ITRs that would have expanded the role of the ITU into Internet-related matters, causing New Zealand and others to decline to sign on to the new Treaty. So, the Internet and Telecommunications communities watched with some apprehension as plans were drawn up for the ITU’s four-yearly “AGM” – its plenipotentiary meeting, in Busan, Korea in November 2014. At these meetings the ITU elects its senior leadership, sets its budget, and charts a course for the coming four years. Early drafts of proposed resolutions again revealed that some member states wanted to insert the ITU into Internet related rulemaking. On this occasion the Treaty in question was the Tunis Agenda, adopted by the ITU and a number of other multilateral organisations after the World Summit on the Information Society in 2005. That set out clearly respective roles for governments in relation to the Internet. The New Zealand government delegation to Busan worked closely with the delegations of other like-minded delegations to either oppose attempts to introduce rules or polices that were outside the remit of the ITU, or to amend them to fit that remit. For example, the Russian government’s delegation proposed changes that would have resulted in the ITU issuing IP addresses – a task currently performed under ICANN supervision by the Regional Internet Registries. This proposal was defeated. The Indian government’s delegation proposed sweeping changes to IP allocation that would have required a restructuring of the Internet’s infrastructure: this too did not proceed. A Latin American proposal to have the ITU establish standards for Internet exchange points for peering traffic was defeated, as were many other attempted expansions of the ITU role. It is important to note that these results were achieved by an international consensus, without a dissenting vote, and without the drama of the conflict at WCIT two years previously. In general, the Internet community felt satisfied after the Busan Plenipotentiary that the Internet policy and resource coordination role conducted by ICANN had been recognised and more firmly established at the Treaty level. The ITU is expected to retain a vital interest in the “boundary” issues between telecommunications standards and the Internet, but hopefully attempts to have the ITU make Internet regulations will diminish until they are thing of the distant past. Law Society Cricket Bell Gully team wins back Blundell Cup after 12 years By John Porter AFTER the high wind and heavy rain courtesy of Cyclone Pam, the weather Gods smiled on Kelburn park and the match between the Law Society and Bell Gully was played on a lively wicket in the Autumn sun on 18 March. Bell Gully batted first and Michael Green compiled an elegant 35 runs, ably supported by the more agricultural Brendon Cash with a dogged 21. Zac Kedgley-Foot struck a fine 30 whilst Irene Peters held up an end, and the firm reached a total of 149. For the Society, Mathew Brown bowled well, as did Oliver Kirk. The Belly Gully bowlers, full of fire and with the advantage of youth took full benefit from the lively pitch and had the Law Society batsmen under pressure throughout. Phillip Bremer made a quick fire 29, and Mical Treadwell (having already taken a fine catch in the outfield in the Bell Gully innings) struck some lusty blows for 32 but the rest of the Society 11 played like the Black Caps in the final – falling 29 runs short at 120. As always, the game was played in a great spirit and it is good to see younger members of the profession making an enthusiastic contribution both on the field and at the after match function. This the first time that Bell Gully have won the Sir Denis Blundell trophy since 2002, and the Society look forward to the challenge of recovering the trophy next year. 6 VUW Law Faculty COUNCIL BRIEF, APRIL 2015 Law Dean signs off, and memories of old Saigon By Professor Tony Smith, Dean of Victoria University’s Law School From the Dean of Law THIS Council Brief column, probably my last as Dean, is being written in Hanoi, and more specifically in the Metropole Hotel, where writers such as Somerset Maugham and Graham Greene found inspiration. The “Hanoi Hilton”, where American airmen (including Presidential hopeful Senator McCain) were incarcerated during what is known here as “the American war”, is just a few blocks away. As it happens, I am here on the fortieth anniversary of what the Viet Nam News refers to as the Liberation of South Viet Nam and National Reunification, the end, in effect, of the war. There has been a certain amount of coverage of these matters in the local press; public celebrations are planned. Under the headline “American War veterans recall final hours of the fall of Sai Gon”, the heroes of the revolution are honoured. It seems absurd now that we were as a nation once so hopelessly at odds with these frenetically friendly, hospitable and positive people. I mention all this because the Vietnamese war dominated my time at university, not least because I was an army conscript – a “birthday boy” – since my birth date had been selected in the ballot for National Service. The Australians sent some of their conscripts to war (even one of their most revered cricketers was not spared – Dougie Walters for the cricket tragics amongst you), and there was no way of knowing whether New Zealand might follow suit. Thankfully, it did not. All that conflict started 50 years ago – a lifetime. That is the period for which I have been closely involved with the Law, and a couple of my class-mate contemporaries, life-long friends, recently raised a glass with me to celebrate our milestone. From a young (pre-teen) age, I knew that I was fascinated by the law, avidly reading biographies of the leading (usually English) barristers such as Marshall Hall and Norman Birkett. Cheerful Yesterdays by OTJ Alpers was a local work that intrigued me too. As I made my way through the degree (at Canterbury), I assumed that I would practise locally. My eyes and horizon were widened by Hamish Gray, the first full-time Dean at Canterbury. Some of my memories of him are particularly vivid. He took me to task for using – or it may be coining – the word “malconstrued” when “misconstrued” would have been more usual mot juste. As for spelling “judgment” with an “e” – Hibernian scorn infused his reaction: “A Christian might spell it with an ‘e’,” Mr X, “but a lawyer neverrr would”. It was he who first alerted me to the attractions of the academic life. To Cambridge I went, thinking that it was to be for three years only. Hah… The Metropole has recently discovered a bomb shelter hidden in its foundations. How you could lose a bomb shelter is a bit of a mystery to me, but my guide book says that “the hotel became deplorably run down during the austere years of state socialism between 1954 and 1986”, and I am picking that it happened then. Joan Baez, one of my student heroines and Jane Fonda (she was known as “Hanoi Jane” at one stage, you may remember) apparently both sought its discomforts at one time or another. The hotel runs twice-daily tours, and I hope to be able to find the time to take one. The eight and a bit years that I have been back in New Zealand and Wellington have disappeared at an alarming rate. The world in which the current students are educated is utterly different from my own upbringing. It is infinitely more pressurised than was ours in all sorts of ways. Financial concerns lead the way, and these can result in some students finding it difficult to devote an appropriate amount of time to study. They have real concerns about the longer term future – finding a job at the end of it all being topmost of these. The two greatest changes are undoubtedly the numbers of young women who study law, and the changes Smarter Scheduling in District Courts From Tony Fisher General Manager District Courts, Ministry of Justice WITH hundreds of thousands of events scheduled in New Zealand District Courts each year, a smarter approach to scheduling is set to deliver benefits for those that work in and use the criminal courts. Traditionally district court users have been told to come to court in the morning and wait for their case to be called. The worst case scenario – a wait of up to seven hours. This is not a good use of the time of our partners such as Corrections, Police and Lawyers. This is also an added stress for victims of crime, and a lot to ask of the family members and friends who come to support them. All District Courts with sufficient volume are moving to a more efficient approach to scheduling. Rather than being expected to come to court for the day, people will be asked to come for a block of time. For example, a district court might schedule a day’s sentencing events into 3 x 75 minutes blocks. Participants will be asked to be at court by the start of the time block to which their event is assigned. By 1 April 2015 sentencing, crown sentencing, case reviews and jury trial call-over events will be scheduled into time blocks. Lists will also be time-blocked shortly after this. Court staff will be working with local stakeholders to determine scheduling of time blocks that make sense for each court. Getting the full benefit from these changes is dependent on all court users coming to court at their scheduled time. Time-blocking has been made easier by a substantial upgrade to the system used to schedule cases so a time and date for the next hearing can be set before the parties leave the courtroom. Real time scheduling also paves the way for future developments, such as providing Police and Corrections improved visibility to up-todate court schedules and first appearance availability. Reducing waiting times also needs to be balanced against the best use of judicial time. Initially this will be addressed by a “morning heavy” approach to scheduling to ensure that there are sufficient cases to proceed with. This aligns with the current national judicial rostering capacities set by the Chief District Court Judge. Smarter scheduling will improve the court experience by reducing the time court users have to spend in court waiting for their case to be heard. This is part of delivering a modern, accessible people-centred justice system. that have been wrought by the use of modern technology to afford us access to vast amounts of legal materials. As late as 1982, when Glanville Williams wrote his last edition of Learning the Law, no mention was made of the new technology other than in a section telling the young that this was a developing sector, and that they might be better off looking for a job in its confines rather than embark on the study of the Law unless they were really determined that the Law was their destiny. It is a privilege to have held the position as Dean of Victoria’s Law Faculty. My responsibilities have been too various to capture in such a limited space, but they include the need to improve and develop the environment in which students are able to flourish, to make the most of the educational opportunities a university education affords. It has also involved making sure that my Faculty colleagues have the resources with which to provide the best possible education, and work in an atmosphere that encourages them to produce worldclass scholarship. If I had one overall objective at the outset of my tenure, it was that VUW Law Faculty would become more widely recognised in the international legal community of legal scholars. I saw this as a two-way process. We should be bringing more of our international colleagues to spend time in our midst, whether as individual scholars, or as speakers at conferences organised locally. Conversely, I hoped that more of my colleagues would travel, to attend and present papers at international conferences, to hold visiting Fellowships at Universities worldwide, and so forth. Whether I have succeeded in achieving the aspiration is a matter for others to decide, but we have had tremendous support for these purposes from individuals and organisations. I will name them on a later occasion, when I can make absolutely sure that I omit none. Best wishes to all. The President of the Wellington Branch NZ Law Society and the editor of Council Brief, would like to thank Professor Tony Smith most warmly for writing columns on behalf of the Victoria Law School for the past seven or eight years. Often provocative, always cogently argued, and covering a wide range of subjects, Tony Smith has challenged our readers and provided a vital bridge between the Society and the Faculty which has been very welcome. We will miss him and wish him all the best. Bilateral arbitration treaty and Rainbow Warrior focus for visiting research fellow A proposed bilateral arbitration treaty and the 30th anniversary of the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior will be the focus of a visit from world leading international arbitrator and litigator Gary Born next month. Mr Born has been awarded the New Zealand Centre of Gary Born International Economic Law’s (NZCIEL) Inaugural Senior Visiting Research Fellowship for 2015 and will visit New Zealand from 1 to 9 May. While in New Zealand, Mr Born will discuss his recent initiative – Bilateral Arbitration Treaty regime – with government representatives and businesses. This is aimed at addressing the adverse consequences that some businesses are facing because of the structure of the international litigation system, which is often time-consuming, expensive and inefficient. He will also give a number of public lectures, co-hosted by Victoria University, including a panel discussion on the Rainbow Warrior, 30 years since its sinking. Mr Born acted as counsel for Greenpeace in the Greenpeace v France arbitration, which concluded with an award of damages in favour of Greenpeace. Other panellists include Dr Gerard Curry (counsel for Alain Mafart and Dominique Prieur), Sir Kenneth Keith, Bill Mansfield, Sir Geoffrey Palmer and Dr Penelope Ridings. More information on Gary Born’s visit is available at: http://www.victoria.ac.nz/law/centres/nzciel/news Public discussion forums with Gary Born: The Rainbow Warrior– A Game Changer? A 30 Year Retrospective – Monday 4 May 2015, 5.30pm – 7.00pm, GBLT1, Victoria University Faculty of Law, 55 Lambton Quay. Gary Born acted as counsel for Greenpeace in the Greenpeace v France arbitration. Public forum on a Bilateral Arbitration Treaty Regime – Tuesday 5 May 2015, 6pm-7.00pm, Salmond Room, GB219, Level 2, Victoria University Faculty of Law, 55 Lambton Quay Community Law 7 COUNCIL BRIEF, APRIL 2015 Love online: advising victims of ‘romance scams’ By Hannah Northover IN the internet age, when genuine relationships often develop online, it can be hard to tell whether love is real. But falling victim to a “romance scam” can have serious practical and emotional impacts. Over the last few years, Community Law has seen an increase in the number of clients trapped by romance scammers. The experience of every client adds to our understanding of this very specific kind of scam, and means we’re better able to help other clients in similar situations. In this article we share some of what we have learnt, hoping to help you to support clients in similar circumstances. We have seen clients who have lost much more than discretionary income to scammers. Scammers start with small amounts of money, but eventual losses of several thousand dollars are not uncommon, and clients even take out loans to meet the scammers’ demands. Typically in romance scams, the scammed person is contacted using a dating website, social media or email. The scammer then gains the affection of the target person and leverages these emotions first to request money for things like visa applications and flights, and then for larger emergency sums. What can you do if a client has been affected by a romance scam? The starting point should be to understand the client’s current point of view. Some clients are lucky enough to spot the scam early, others may have already lost a lot of money or be in serious debt, and some clients may still be in thrall to the scammer. If a client seeks advice (or perhaps just the witnessing of a signature) and you have a gut feeling that something is not right, ask sensitive questions to find out the full picture of the client’s concerns. Witnessing signatures on dodgy documents Clients come to us with apparently simple requests to have their signature witnessed. The documents purport to be prepared by foreign lawyers and feature a lot of legalese. Clients are typically happy for us to search the relevant lawyer register for the “lawyer” involved. That is often a clear way to show the client that the document does not check out. Online detective work When correspondence provided by the client sets alarm bells ringing for you, internet searching can often help your client to begin to share your concerns. Direct evidence can be established by looking for distinctive phrases used by the scammer, and for email addresses or names used, and running them through internet scam databases or just googling them. However, scammers who have reached a certain level of “professionalism” will change their names and email addresses constantly. Direct evidence linking the correspondence to past scams can be hard to find. Circumstantial evidence can pile up more quickly. Check for inconsistencies, for example email addresses which don’t match names or “law firms”. Check for unprofessional personal email addresses based in unlikely jurisdictions. Check addresses on google maps to see if the “law firm” is based in an industrial area, or in a government building. Engage in some simple online detective work and start to suggest to your client that this all seems suspicious. To minimise emotional and financial harm to your client you need to help them to realise it is a scam, urge them to cut off contact, and link them to support services. It is very unlikely that any money will be recovered. You’re not the only one Once you are convinced it is a scam, convincing your client can take longer. For some clients, circumstantial evidence is not enough. They have been engaged with the scammer for months, messaging and skyping, and they have raised fears with the scammer and had them allayed already. It can be powerful to let the client know that they are not alone. There is a pattern for these scams. The pattern works because it plays to the good, real, trusting, human nature of your client. Reading online descriptions of romance scams and seeing how their experience fits the mould can show Continued on page 8 COUNCIL BRIEF CROSSWORD PRACTISING WELL You can use this diagram for either the Quick or Cryptic Clues, but the answers in each case are different. This month’s solutions are on page 2. Chaplain, Julia Coleman, 027 285 9115 Cryptic Clues ACROSS DOWN 1. 7. 1. See 10 Across Part of the construction I considered to be of Greek origin (5) 8. Remove some of the charge to produce a flashy effect (7) 10 & 1Ac. What may be found at a bargain sale of brushes! (8,10) 11. The stronghold offered military resistance, we hear (4) 13. A container for a variety of cakes before tea (6) 15. Watch the teleprinter (6) 17. Country in which I didn’t dawdle (4) 18. This clue will give you some choice (8) 21. Lacking the potential to be famous (7) 22. Shackles used by those who wish to drive a long way (5) 23. In sleep etc. it could be a serious nuisance (10) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 9. 12. 14. 16. 19. 20. Quick Clues Firing-place a set distance from the target (5) Make sense of French code (8) Settlement only modified by the company (6) Ophelia, Goneril and another Shakespearian character inside (4) Radio set-up necessary for trawlermen? (7) Sid coming back with a piece for biological analysis (10) He has a life-interest in his subject (10) Splitting up a body of soldiers (8) State affected by the French city in U.S. (7) What the campanologist produces, we hear, to evoke sympathetic interest (6) This holds the victim in fatal suspense (5) Lend support to a speculative venture (4) ACROSS DOWN 1. 7. 8. 10. 11. 13. 15. 17. 18. 21. 22. 23. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 9. 12. 14. 16. 19. 20. Choice (10) Oust (5) Clearer (7) Outside (8) Minus (4) Struggle (6) Doorway (6) Ale (4) Outlook (8) Directly stated (7) Well done! (5) Dejected (10) Flattened fold (5) Completely (8) Use (6) Vivacity (4) Agree (7) Hateful (10) Determination (10) Practicable (8) Spire (7) Jail (6) Precise (5) Profound (4) Council Brief Advertising [email protected] MA DES IG N !!!!!!!!" 1 What am I if – a) I am found at the end of rainbows b) I am always spelled incorrectly c) Read, midday, left or right, I am the same upside-down or right-side-up d) I occur easily but, well, only once in a millennium e) I am a 10-letter word that can be typed using just the first row of letters on a keyboard? m Law graduate CV scheme scheme to assist law ?^$ THE graduates into work is still being by the Wellington >$ operated Branch. =$ Law graduates seeking work leave their CVs at the Society. <$ These are available to potential ;$ employers needing staff who refer to the CVs and choose :$ can appropriate graduates. The work offered need not be 9$ permanent. Any work in a law 8$ office will give graduates experi2 It is black’s turn to move. What that may be helpful next should black do? %@ABCDEFG' ence time they make job applications. © Mark Gobbi 2015 8 Notices COUNCIL BRIEF, APRIL 2015 ROOM AVAILABLE WILL ENQUIRIES Do you want to be part of an established chambers, either full time or part time? FOR URGENT ACTION Featherston Chambers has a furnished room available for 2 – 5 days per week including full door tenancy, for a barrister, who would join four colleagues, in an elegant professional environment in a recently renovated historic building close to the courts. Please contact the solicitors concerned if you are holding a will for any of the following: Facilities include website (http://featherstonchambers.co.nz ), library, conference room, Wi-Fi, in house CPD seminars, kitchen, shower, off-street parking. NEEDHAM, Louise Alice C/- Te Hopai Home & Hospital, 33 Rintoul Street, Newtown, Wellington. Retired. Single. Age 85. Date of birth 11 June 1929. Died at Wellington 5 December 2014. Public Trust (Glen Hildreth) PO Box 31446, Lower Hutt DX RP42084 Tel 04 978 4809 Fax 04 978 4931 [email protected] Please email [email protected] TAKE A DEEP BREATH A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP FOR WOMEN LAWYERS WITH 9 YEARS OR MORE PQE – ‘MID CAREER’ ■ The cost of will notices is $50.00 (GST inclusive). Please send payment with your notice. ■ Will notices should be sent to the Branch Manager, NZ Law Society Wellington Branch, PO Box 494, Wellington. Council Brief Advertising [email protected] Professional development group for mid-career women lawyers Mary Scholtens QC, together with experienced coach and facilitator Ava Gibson, offer a confidential Friday lunchtime discussion and development group over 6 weeks for a small number of women practitioners (maximum of 8). Objectives The purpose of this group is to provide a supportive and wise environment to discuss professional issues, to draw on collective insight and experience and to learn new strategies to enhance your practice of the law. When? Six lunchtime sessions from 1.00pm to 2.15pm each Friday from 1 May to 5 June. Where? Boardroom, Stout Street Chambers, Level 6, Huddart Parker Building, 1 Post Office Square, Wellington. Cost? $950 + GST (includes light healthy lunches and a 30 minute individual coaching session). CPD Potential number of CPD hours – 6. For more information or to signal your interest or to register, please visit www.orbsolutions.co.nz/deepbreath.html or email [email protected] MARY Scholtens QC and experienced coach and facilitator Ava Gibson are now offering their unique form of small-group professional development to women in “mid-career”. Anyone with more than eight years’ experience since admission can register an interest, and Mary and Ava will endeavour to arrange the make-up of groups to suit the needs of the individuals. The groups are a maximum of eight women who meet weekly for six weeks. These confidential lunchtime sessions aim to provide a “supportive and wise environment” to discuss professional issues, to draw on collective insight and experience, and to learn new strategies for ensuring that we, as women, thrive as we practise law. The format of week- ly lunchtime sessions provides an opportunity for participants to reflect and review between sessions. Before the group begins Mary schedules a brief introductory telephone discussion with each registrant where potential areas of focus are discussed. These conversations guide the selection of relevant topics. In previous groups content has included understanding the factors that contribute to success, confidence, resilience and wellbeing as women working in the law; career planning and development; managing workplace relationships, performance management; and balancing work with other aspects of life. Relevant articles are made available on each topic. The confidentiality of the Continued from previous page Love online: advising victims of ‘romance scams’ clients they are not alone, but that this is a scam. Consumer Affairs’ Scamwatch profiles the romance scammer: “They’re a 31-year-old, attractive, Christian female, of mixed ethnicity, looking for an older male, or a 58-year-old professional male looking for a younger companion.” Block the scammer Communication and money flow need to be blocked immediately. It is best to stop all interaction with the scammer – blocking phone numbers, email addresses and social media profiles used. Prepare the client for the scammer’s reaction: the scammer will try to regain the client’s trust using ever new narratives and applying emotional pressure. Strongly advise the client not to authorise any further money transfers, to cancel pre-authorised debits, and to contact their bank. If money transfers did take place, the client’s bank account might have been used for money laundering; in that case, inform the bank as soon as possible to avoid criminal prosecution. Contacting the client’s bank might also help to minimise losses by stopping further suspicious transactions. Make sure that the client does not sign a power of attorney or any other authorisation. Victim Support Coping with a break-up can be tough. To find out the whole relationship was a scam can be much harder. Victim Support (0800 VICTIM) can offer the support which clients are likely to need. Falling victim to a scam can rock a client’s faith in human nature and in their own judgement. Reporting Reporting the scam online to Scamwatch can be a good way for the client to process the loss and to take a constructive step to protect other people by sharing their story. Another option is reporting the scam to the police, though this might be stressful for the client and the outcome disappointing. Make sure you do not raise false hopes of convicting the offender: scammers disguise their identity and IP address using fake data and botnets, and usually operate from places well outside the reach of prosecution services. Next level The next risk your client faces is that the scammer, once revealed, admits it was a scam but asserts that this time everything is different. They have truly fallen in love. In this case, sensitively explain that this too is an established scam technique. Perhaps for determined clients, suggest that the usual rules for lending must still apply: only lend what you’re willing to lose. group is emphasised with all participants undertaking to keep confidential the discussions of others. The registration fee includes a healthy lunch plus an individual coaching conversation with Ava once the group has finished. The coaching assists participants with integrating learning, reflecting on their ongoing learning needs, and developing an action plan for the future. Previous successful courses for women lawyers with about 5 to 8 years’ experience since admission were prompted by the large numbers of lawyers who either leave the profession or find progression difficult, together with the alarmingly high rates of depression reported among those who stay. Women have attracted particular attention. Mary and Ava are passionate about sharing strategies that help women to flourish in their chosen environments. Expressions of interest are invited for courses over the following periods: Course 2: Friday 1 May to Friday 5 June Course 3: Friday 7 August to Friday 11 September More information about Mary can be found at www.stoutstreet.co.nz/mary and about Ava at www.orbsolutions.co.nz/aboutus Further information including feedback from past participants and a registration form is available online at http:// orbsolutions.co.nz/deepbreath. Alternatively you can email [email protected] for further information.