Application to disqualify counsel — appearance of injustice — independence of lawyer — lawyer self-acting — Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008, rr 13.5 & 13.5.3 — District Court Rules 2014, r 1.24 — Tonise v Woodroffe Law Partnership [2020] NZHC 1926 — Time v Fagalilo HC Wellington CIV-2008-485-540, 9 March 2010 — Time v Fagalilo HC Wellington CIV-2008-485-540, 30 June 2010 — Time v Fagalilo [2011] NZCA 605 — Woodroffe Law Partnership v Fagalilo [2018] NZHC 2727 — Re: GJ Mannix Ltd [1984] 1 NZLR 309 — Li v Liu [2018] NZCA 528 — Siemer v Solictor-General [2013] NZSC 68 — Anderson v De Marco [2020] NZHC 837. This hearing was to determine an application by the second defendant for an order that the lawyer be debarred from acting as counsel for the plaintiff law firm. The substantive proceedings were for summary judgment against the defendants for the payment of legal fees. The second defendant claimed it was a breach of the lawyer's professional obligations under r 13.5 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules ("ROCCC") and r 1.24 of the District Court Rules, as the lawyer was the only member of the plaintiff law firm whose present instructions were received and who gave advice in relation to the original proceedings. The lawyer claimed it was not a breach of ROCCC, r 13.5 as under r 13.5.3 the rule did not apply where the lawyer was acting for herself, as was the case here. The Judge noted that the overarching test for disqualifying counsel from acting was whether it would create an appearance of injustice. The lawyer was not merely acting for herself in the proceedings, but also for another member of the law firm. The Judge considered that permitting her to act in these proceedings would not enable her to have the required independence and objectivity. The Judge made an order disqualifying the lawyer from acting as counsel in the proceedings. Judgment Date: 18 December 2020.