Orlov v New Zealand Law Society (Auckland Branch) HC Auckland CIV 2010-404-2868

[2010] NZHC 2298

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV 2010-404-2868

BETWEEN  EVGENY ORLOV Plaintiff

ANDNEW ZEALAND LAW SOCIETY (AUCKLAND BRANCH)

First Respondent

ANDAUCKLAND STANDARDS COMMITTEE

Second Respondent

ANDAUCKLAND LAWYERS STANDARDS COMMITTEE NO. 1

Third Respondent

Hearing:         17 December 2010

Counsel:         E Orlov, in person, Plaintiff

W C Pyke for First, Second and Third Defendants
M Muir for non-party, Mr D J Gates

C T Patterson for non-parties (himself, Mr Dunstan and Mr Gittos) Judgment:  17 December 2010

JUDGMENT (NO. 2) OF HEATH J

This judgment was delivered by me on 17 December 2010 at 5.00pm pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the

High Court Rules

Solicitors:

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Marsden Woods Inskip & Smith, PO Box 146, Whangarei

Glaister Ennor, PO Box 63, Auckland
Counsel:
E Orlov, PO Box 8333, Auckland
P J Morgan QC, PO Box 19021, Hamilton

W C Pyke, PO Box 19271, Hamilton

ORLOV V NEW ZEALAND LAW SOCIETY (AUCKLAND BRANCH) AND ORS HC AK CIV 2010-404-

2868  17 December 2010

[1]      Earlier today I heard argument on the following applications made by Mr

Orlov:

a)        Application for discovery against non-parties b)           Application for discovery against defendants

c)       Application  to  join  National  Standards  Committee  and  the  New Zealand Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal (the Tribunal)

d)Application to have preliminary question and substantive proceeding heard before a Full Court.

[2]      I reserved judgment on each application.  However, I am able to give a result judgment, in respect of some of the applications.  Reasons for the decisions set out in this judgment will be given in the substantive judgment that deals with applications that remain reserved.

[3]      Mr Orlov’s application to join the National Standards Committee is granted but his application to join the Tribunal is dismissed.

[4]      The   application   to   have   a   preliminary   question   and   the   substantive proceeding heard before a Full Court is dismissed.

[5]      The timetabling directions made on 22 November 2010 in relation to the obligations  of  the  New  Zealand  Law  Society  (Auckland  Branch),  Auckland Standards Committee and Auckland Lawyers Standards Committee (No. 1) are vacated.[1]   Substitute directions will be made in my reserved judgment.

[1] Orlov v New Zealand Law Society (Auckland Branch) & Ors HC Auckland CIV 2010-404-2868 at para [16].

[6]      Judgment remains reserved on the applications for non-party discovery and discovery against all defendants (including the  newly joined National  Standards Committee).

[7]      I have been assigned as the Judge to case-manage the proceeding and to preside over the trial of the judicial review proceeding, which incorporates claims

under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.  Costs reserved.

P R Heath J

Delivered at 5.00pm on 17 December 2010