The challenges provided by the COVID-19 pandemic are undoubted, but in an interview with Russell McVeagh they also provided some useful lessons.
Partners Caleb Hensman, Kirsten Massey and Cath Shirley-Brown (pictured above) provided some insight into how the firm handled the pandemic during an interview conducted when New Zealand was operating under Alert Level 1.
Noting that the SkyCity Convention Centre fire had substantially closed the central city and tested the ability of buisnesses to operate under emergency conditions.
As with many firms, the move to increased technology use also made a major difference, but a key factor for the firm has been to maintain and engage with existing clients and networks. The lockdown, they noted, was a chance to ‘take stock’ and ensure that relationships are nurtured and built upon, said Cath Shirley-Brown.
Caleb Hensman noted that there was the chance to re-examine how operations were conducted and to properly understand the strengths and risks of people within the firm, including clients.
“Preparing for economic downturn and a range of scenarios, and being able to adjust to the evolving situation, will help you lay the groundwork now for future success,” he said.
The full article can be seen here.
[adrotate banner=”100″]
[adrotate banner=”103″]
- John Edwards’ £200k Privacy Limbo
- Antonia Watson Exits As ANZ Doubles Down On NZ$125m CCCFA Appeal
- NZ Lawyer News – Health law heavyweight Dr Jonathan Coates joins Britomart Chambers
- New Zealand Legal Tech Company Just Launched An AI Workspace For In-House Teams Globally
- Bell Gully Bought Harvey Firm-Wide. The Supreme Court Just Made That Look Prescient
In Jones v Family Court at Whangārei [2026] NZSC 1, the Supreme Court used a published judgment to call out a litigant for citing case law that an AI application had invented. Meanwhile, Bell Gully had become the first large New Zealand firm to roll out Harvey AI to its entire 200-plus lawyer team. What the Supreme Court Said Justices Ellen France, Stephen Kós and Forrest Miller dismissed Mr Jones’s leave application after identifying that submissions cited several authorities that “appear to have been hallucinated by an Artificial Intelligence (AI) application”. Specific examples included “Teddy v Police [2015] NZSC 62” and “Baird v R [2013] NZSC 120” — real case names combined with incorrect citations, while four genuine cases were misused to support propositions they did not stand for. The issue for New Zealand law firms. Log in to read . . - Father and Son Law Partners Fined for ‘Grave’ Client Conflicts in Palmerston North
- Why Law Firms Feel Busier Than Ever, But Still Lack Pipeline Confidence
