A judge's claim that criminal defence lawyer Chris Comeskey misled the Court of Appeal is "entirely wrong", barrister Russell Fairbrother says.
Mr Fairbrother was acting yesterday on behalf of Mr Comeskey at a New Zealand Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal.
Mr Comeskey has been charged with misleading the court, whichis a breach of his "overriding duty to the court" and of the professional conduct rules for barristers and solicitors.
The charge, laid by the New Zealand Law Society, relates to a Court of Appeal hearing for Mr Comeskey's client Xiao Hui Huang.
Huang was found guilty of having methamphetamine for supply and conspiring to supply it, after Customs and police found 8kg of drugs, estimated to be worth about $8 million. She was jailed for 12 years.
The Court of Appeal dismissed Huang's appeals against conviction and sentence in March last year and rejected Mr Comeskey's criticisms of the Crown case.
In the decision, Justice John Wild said Mr Comeskey misled the court.
"Optimistic would be a charitable description of the last of Mr Comeskey's submissions. Misleading would perhaps be a more accurate one.
"Need we mention the importance of counsel accurately stating the position, and being absolutely candid and forthright with the court?"
However, Mr Fairbrother successfully asked yesterday for the hearing to be adjourned, as he had applied to the Court of Appeal to have the judgment recalled.
In his submissions to the tribunal, Mr Fairbrother said: "It will be argued that no foundation for the allegations of deception or ineptitude can be found in the transcript of the hearing."
John Billington, QC, acting on behalf of the Law Society, opposed the adjournment.
But he conceded that if the Court of Appeal judgment was withdrawn, the Law Society "will have to review whether there is a proper basis to proceed with the charge".
Mr Fairbrother said if the application to recall the judgment failed, he would seek a judicial review.
