Victim: ‘Bend-over barrister’ gets off lightly

The New Zealand Law Society fined and censured Auckland barrister John Eichelbaum earlier this month. The woman behind the complaint says the published decision contains a watered-down version of what happened. Cecile Meier reports.

Jane knew something was off when she saw the pair of ‘‘skimpy, red, lacy panties’’ on John Eichelbaum’s hedge. The young lawyer was visiting the senior barrister’s property with an expert to examine evidence for her real estate client’s case.

Eichelbaum was representing himself in a lawsuit against Jane’s client, who had sold him her own Parnell home in a private deal.

When Jane (not her real name) and her expert saw the underwear, they were embarrassed and intimidated.

Eichelbaum ‘‘giggled and said something about them being tied to his car aerial at the weekend’’, Jane says. He then refused to let her expert come with her.

A couple of days later, Eichelbaum changed his mind and allowed both Jane and her expert back on site. But this time, he only allowed them to carry out the inspection if Jane bent over in front of him through a window to sign a piece of wood.

Jane, who was was wearing a fitted skirt and high heels, and her expert protested but Eichelbaum ‘‘wouldn’t back down’’.

‘‘As I was worried about wasting my client’s money, I agreed to perform the manoeuvre, which was embarrassing, and he thought it was hilarious.’’

After the two ‘‘degrading’’ encounters, Jane says more harassment, including threats and inappropriate language, followed over about 18 months.

She made a complaint to the New Zealand Law Society about Eichelbaum’s behaviour in May 2014, which this month resulted in censure and a $10,000 fine. He was also censured and fined $10,000 over a complaint laid by her client.

In this separate case, the committee found Eichelbaum displayed ‘‘threatening, bullying, insulting behaviour’’ towards the client over a five-year period.

Jane believes she is not the only one Eichelbaum has harassed and bullied and won’t be the last.

In 2015, he was censured by the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal after it found him guilty of two charges of misconduct and one charge of unsatisfactory conduct.

The tribunal found he had sent his client a threatening draft affidavit containing ‘‘offensive and scurrilous remarks against the client’’, alongside six emails or letters sent to other lawyers that were ‘‘discourteous’’ – some of them containing threats.

Jane says it took a lot of courage to bring her complaint against a senior lawyer, the son of former chief justice Sir Thomas Eichelbaum. ‘‘I can’t help but wonder whether he received a light penalty because of his good family name.’’

She says part of her complaint, which Stuff has seen, included his threat to sue her as a defendant in a conspiracy proceeding if her client didn’t pay him $50,000. She said it felt like blackmail.

‘‘This threat alone, in the absence of other complaints, should have resulted in a much tougher penalty.’’

Second finding

Former lawyer Olivia Wensley, who has been vocal about sexual harassment in the law industry, says the case makes her angry.

‘‘This is a second finding against this man. He got a light slap on the wrist for sexual harassment and other obnoxious behaviour over a long period. The $10,000 ‘fine’ is what many barristers charge for just 10 hours’ work.

‘‘And so it continues, powerful men are protected and face little consequences when women are brave and make a complaint. Nothing will change until these perpetrators face real, hard consequences.’’

Wensley is disappointed the decision – ‘‘an extremely sanitised account of the original complaint’’ – did not call the behaviour sexual harassment. ‘‘Let’s call a spade a spade, it is sexual harassment.’’

Jane says she filed her complaint as ‘‘breach of respect and courtesy’’ because the act governing lawyers’ professional conduct does not have any specific provision for sexual harassment.

New Zealand Law Society executive director Mary Ollivier says the rules governing lawyers’ conduct incorporated ‘‘the obligation to treat all lawyers with respect and courtesy’’, which included sexual harassment and other unacceptable conduct.

Lawyers could face two levels of disciplinary finding: unsatisfactory conduct, which included unbecoming or unprofessional conduct, or misconduct, which included conduct regarded as disgraceful or dishonourable.

‘‘In this case, the standards committee considered Mr Eichelbaum’s conduct to be of a serious nature and at the high end of unsatisfactory conduct.’’

A censure is not a light punishment for a lawyer, she says.

The maximum fine that could be imposed under the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act was $15,000.

Complaints involving sexual harassment could be reported to the society. ‘‘The law society accepts that making a complaint can be a confronting experience for victims. It is committed to exploring ways to address this.’’

Eichelbaum declined to comment.