Oh also threatened his clients with financial penalties if they complained about him or left their jobs within two years – something he said would cost them $1000 for every month not worked.
The tribunal said these conditions were not enforceable.
Clients ‘got exactly what they contracted for’
The tribunal said Oh’s clients were fully informed of the cost at the outset and “got exactly what they contracted for”.
But it said that he placed his own interests and those of the employers above those of his “vulnerable” clients, who were from the Philippines or Sri Lanka, seeking jobs as chefs or waitresses, or in one case as a nurse.
The nine complainants in the case have name suppression. All obtained a visa and a job.
“We do not criticise [Oh’s] entrepreneurial zeal,” the tribunal said.
“What concerns us is his passion to promote his scheme exposed a large blind spot in his professionalism.
“The conduct shows little comprehension of a lawyer’s duty to advance the interests of the client,” the tribunal said.
“It introduces conflicts between interests of his clients with third parties [the employers].”
Tribunal says ‘we were not impressed’
The tribunal decision said Oh attempted to explain to it how the unenforceable terms threatening penalties were supposedly for the benefit of his clients.
“We were not impressed,” it said.
“He suggested that immigration law is special and that a lawyer’s relationship with a client is different where it comes to commercial aspects. We were not impressed.
“At the conclusion of his oral evidence, we were shocked to have had it demonstrated how this experienced sole practitioner could have got these fundamentals so wrong.”
The tribunal ordered Oh to reduce the fees he had charged to eight of the complainants by 20%.
He has also been banned from practising law on his own account until authorised by the tribunal to do so.
It said he was experienced and “technically competent” as a lawyer but lacked a fundamental understanding of the professional stance he should adopt.
The tribunal allowed him to keep practising under the “structured oversight” of another lawyer, with which he could experience “sound examples” of professional lawyer-client relationships.
Oh was also ordered to pay $68,000 to cover the disciplinary process’ costs.
The tribunal said its censure of Oh would remain permanently on his professional record.
Attempts to reach Oh for comment were not immediately successful.
Previous findings detailed
The tribunal decision disclosed that a standards committee of the Law Society has made findings of unsatisfactory conduct against him twice in the past, before his current case.
These findings related to the terms or clarity of his fees agreements.
In 2018, he was fined $2000. In 2020, he was fined $3500.
The website of Oh’s company, Kenton Chambers, was today still inviting applications from people wanting to relocate to New Zealand, with contact details for agents in Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
Ric Stevens spent many years working for the former New Zealand Press Association news agency, including as a political reporter at Parliament, before holding senior positions at various daily newspapers. He joined NZME’s Open Justice team in 2022 and is based in Hawke’s Bay.
