At a hearing of the Disciplinary Tribunal of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of New Zealand on the 18th day of December 2001, the Tribunal recorded that a member in practice in Auckland pleaded guilty to charges:
THAT in terms of the Institute of Chartered Accountants Act 1996 and the Rules made thereunder, and in particular Rule 21.30, the member:
? Breached the Rules and/or code of ethics of the Institute.
IN THAT
? In circumstances where a firm associated with the member's firm had a continuing professional relationship with a company, the member accepted the appointment as receiver of that company:
(a) in breach of the mandatory requirements of paragraph 11 of SES-1; and/or
(b) in breach of the mandatory requirements of paragraph 17 of SES-1.
Orders of the Tribunal:
(a) Pursuant to Rule 21.33 of the Rules of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of New Zealand, the Disciplinary Tribunal ordered that the member pay to the Institute the sum of $5,549.00 (inclusive of G.S.T.) in respect of the costs and expenses of the hearing before the Disciplinary Tribunal and the investigation by the Professional Conduct Committee.
(b) The Tribunal made a permanent suppression order of the names of the member, the member's firm and the client.
In accordance with Rule 21.35 of the Rules of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of New Zealand, the Disciplinary Tribunal directed that the decision be published in the Chartered Accountants Journal of New Zealand, the
New Zealand Gazette, the New Zealand Herald and the Public Practice News without mention of the member's name or firm but with mention of the locality.
Right of Appeal
Pursuant to Rule 21.41 of the Rules of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of New Zealand, which were in force at the time of the original notice of complaint, the member may, not later than 28 days after the notification of this Tribunal to the member of the exercise of its powers, appeal in writing to the Appeals Council of the Institute against the decision.
No decision, other than the direction as to publicity and the name suppression order, shall take effect while the member remains entitled to appeal or while any such appeal by the member awaits determination by the Appeals Council.
In presenting the determination of the Tribunal, the chairman expressed the discomfort of the Tribunal about the relationship of the Institute's ethical guidelines relating to insolvency practice to the independence provisions of the Code of Ethics.
The Tribunal urged a review of the relationship between the various promulgations.
Dated this 19th day of December 2001.
MARK SHENNAN, Secretary, Disciplinary Tribunal.