A lawyer has been accused of obtaining his neighbour’s criminal history from the Department of Corrections and disclosing it to a property manager during a mediation over a driveway stoush.

The neighbour’s wife did not know about her husband’s convictions and claimed the news was delivered by the lawyer in an “attacking manner” that was “entirely inappropriate“.

A hearing into his alleged conduct held this week was told lawyers can request copies of their clients’ criminal histories but can not request those of members of the public.

However, the Auckland criminal defence lawyer, who has interim name suppression, allegedly used his familiarity with a probation officer to request his neighbour’s.

It’s alleged he then disclosed the information to his and the neighbour’s property manager during a mediation meeting, which was also attended by the neighbour’s wife.

“It was the most traumatic time of my life, I’ve never been treated like that by anyone,” the woman told the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal hearing, where the lawyer was defending charges of misconduct.

The standards committee, pursuing the charges on behalf of the Law Society, alleges he likely obtained his neighbour’s criminal record from a probation officer.

The committee claims he used his status as a lawyer to access the information around eight years ago, and then used it for his personal benefit.

The neighbour’s wife, who also cannot be named, told the hearing she believed the lawyer was trying to get the couple kicked out of the property.

She said she was unaware of her husband’s conviction history and that having them disclosed to her in such a way was entirely inappropriate.

“He delivered that to me in a very attacking manner,” she claimed.

The woman said they moved out of the property about a year after the mediation meeting.

“I couldn’t sleep at night being around that negativity,” she said, “We shared a driveway so it’s not like we could avoid him.”

The lawyer accepted it was an “error” to disclose the man’s convictions during the mediation meeting but said he had not obtained the information improperly.

He claimed he did not acquire it from a probation officer but rather that police officers had informed him of his neighbour’s criminal history after he had made a complaint about him.

The police's National Intelligence Application holds a wealth of information about millions of New Zealanders. Photo / Peter McIntosh

He also claimed a former judicial officer who was a friend of his had proactively searched for the neighbour’s conviction history and then told him over the phone.

Department of Corrections chief privacy officer Paul Miller gave evidence at the hearing, stating the Privacy Act allowed for Corrections to release information to lawyers about their clients.

Miller explained to the tribunal that he has audit privileges in the system, which leaves digital footprints on every page that staff members access, including a footnote with the time and date each unique login has occurred.

He was positive the probation officer recorded as having accessed the man’s criminal history was the staffer who had accessed it, rather than someone else using her login.

That probation officer, who still works for Corrections, told the tribunal that if any lawyer or police officer asked them for a criminal history, they printed it for them immediately.

She could not specifically recall accessing the man’s history, given it was so long ago, but said it was unlikely that someone else would have used her login.

Driveway stoush

The lawyer told the tribunal that around the time his neighbour moved in, he confronted him about his daughter parking on the shared driveway.

“He was unnecessarily aggressive with me about her car being parked there,” he said.

“It sort of raised a red flag about the sort of man he was.”

After this, several more altercations ensued, prompting the lawyer to call police.

He claimed two officers took a statement from him and then disclosed his neighbour’s conviction history.

It's alleged that a probation officer provided the information to the lawyer. Photo / NZME

“He clearly indicated to me there were convictions but didn’t specify them.”

However, counsel for the Standards Committee, Sam McMullan, said police records show access to the man’s criminal record by officers did not occur until after the mediation meeting.

Police use a different system than Corrections for accessing criminal records and case details, called the National Intelligence Application, but it also records timestamps and dates of every page its staff access.

The claim the lawyer had made about the former judicial officer providing him the information was questioned by the tribunal’s deputy chairman, Dr John Adams.

“It’s a fair question for the tribunal to wonder why she was taking such a huge risk ... if she did this and it became known one would think she would lose her position and be disgraced,” he said.

“Why do you think [she] would take the career and character-threatening step for you, as you say?”

The lawyer said he had disclosed to her the issues he was having.

But he did not immediately tell the Law Society of his claim about the judicial officer providing the information.

“Although I didn’t initiate it, I do feel responsible that she got that information,” he told the tribunal.

“I didn’t want to get her into any trouble.

“She was a friend, she was very concerned ... That’s what I understood about why she did it.”

The tribunal will issue its ruling in writing.

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.