Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill

When the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act was originally passed, it made one or two significant changes to the way in which the legal profession was run in New Zealand. First of all, it recognised and conferred particular recognition on a class of practitioners who were not lawyers but who were registered conveyancers—people who had gained some expertise in the art of conveying property and in satisfying the legal requirements in New Zealand that would be required in such circumstances. The policy background here was to introduce some competition into the system so that the virtual monopoly that had been enjoyed by lawyers previously on this important type of work might be interrupted and prices might come down.

The lawyers and conveyancers legislation went further. It allowed law firms and firms of conveyancers to do something that had not been permitted previously. Previously there had been a requirement that these entities operate only as partnerships and that they not be able to limit their collective liabilities. Basically, every act or deed done by one of these firms would be something that would result in liability for every partner in the firm and would not be able to be contracted out of. The legislation allowed for the incorporation of these entities. It sought to preserve the liability regime that I have described, but, basically, looked at ways to make them more bankable, for want of a better way of describing it.

There are a couple of sensible machinery amendments in Part 2 of this legislation that are consequent on those changes. They relate to the position of the estates, the wills, and the trusts of those who have become involved in conveyancing law firms that are incorporated as a trustee of a trust in which each beneficiary is a relative of one or more of the trustees and each trustee is a conveyancing practitioner, in the case of the registered practitioners, or is a lawyer actively involved in the provision of the body corporate of regulated services. They are sensible changes. There are also changes to the disciplinary regime that applies to lawyers. Applications for a review by the legal complaints review officer of a particular decision or action of a standards committee will have to be lodged within a 30-day working period commencing on the day after a copy or notice of the decision or action is brought to the applicant’s attention. We have always said that we support these amendments. They are sensible. It is just a shame that, although we will be voting for this part, because of the provisions that are contained in Part 1 to which we take strong exception, we will be voting against the bill as a whole.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 136 in the name of the Hon Judith Collins to Part 2 be agreed to.

Amendments agreed to.

Part 2 as amended agreed to.

Clauses 1 to 3