James Gardner-Hopkins found himself at the center of New Zealand’s #MeToo movement after his misconduct towards junior female colleagues at Russell McVeagh was exposed. He was suspended in 2022 for inappropriately touching five young women at two parties in 2015.
Despite his suspension, Gardner-Hopkins applied for a Practising Approval Certificate earlier this year, which sparked opposition from various women’s law associations and individual members who submitted complaints to the New Zealand Law Society.
Following these submissions, multiple women reported that Gardner-Hopkins had been accessing their LinkedIn profiles, openly viewing them as a form of intimidation. The Wellington Women’s Law Association (WWLA) raised concerns about this behavior, stating that it appeared to be a deliberate attempt to intimidate those who had spoken out against him.
The WWLA received complaints from 10 women, including a law student, who claimed that Gardner-Hopkins had viewed their profiles. Barrister Steph Dyhrberg, who represented some of Gardner-Hopkins’ victims, also expressed similar concerns to the Law Society.
In response to the complaints, the New Zealand Women’s Law Journal condemned Gardner-Hopkins’ behavior and called on the Law Society to take it into account when deciding on his practising certificate.
The Law Society confirmed that Gardner-Hopkins’ application is still pending, and they are reviewing the concerns raised by various women’s law associations. They emphasized that all commenters should be treated with respect during the decision-making process.
Despite the allegations, Gardner-Hopkins declined to comment publicly, stating that he was going through a process advised to him.
The submissions against Gardner-Hopkins highlighted the severity of his actions and the impact his readmission would have on the legal profession. The Auckland Women’s Lawyers Association and the Wellington branch both expressed concerns about his fitness to rejoin the profession.
The New Zealand Women’s Law Journal stated that granting him a practising certificate would condone sexual assault and harassment, undermining the efforts of those who have spoken out against such behavior.
In conclusion, the controversy surrounding Gardner-Hopkins’ application for a Practising Approval Certificate continues, with women’s law associations and individual members urging the Law Society to consider the implications of readmitting him into the legal profession.
