03 November 2022

Negligence: Sharma v. Foster-Bohm & Corbin

Nelson lawyer Anjela Sharma was ordered by the District Court to pay $37,500 damages for negligently failing to file clients’ employment claims within time limits and in addition was unsuccessful in suing for unpaid fees.

Her High Court appeal against both rulings was dismissed.

The courts were told clients Gail Foster-Bohm and Andrew Corbin retained Ms Sharma to bring a personal grievance claim against IHC New Zealand after they both lost jobs in 2015, part of IHC restructuring. In 2016, the Employment Relations Authority dismissed their unjustified dismissal claims as being filed out of time. Employment law imposes a strict ninety day time limit.

They then sued Ms Sharma in the District Court for professional negligence.  The trial judge assessed chances of success in their IHC employment dispute as being 75 per cent if the dispute had gone to an Employment Relations hearing.  Mr Corbin was awarded $20,000 damages; Ms Foster-Bohm $17,500.  The differing amounts reflected their respective lengths of IHC employment.

Ms Sharma said the filing deadline was missed because she thought the two were working out four weeks’ notice ending early September 2015.  IHC in fact made payment in lieu of notice and their employment was terminated immediately.

The trial judge ruled Ms Sharma had been made aware of the early termination and failed to act promptly or to request a time extension for filing.  This ruling was upheld on appeal.

There was evidence that Ms Sharma acted unprofessionally towards her clients with delays in responding and also in failing to disclose she did not have professional indemnity insurance.

Ms Sharma’s claim for unpaid fees was dismissed in both the District Court and the High Court.  The trial judge said justice in this case meant the clients should not be required to pay for negligent legal work.  Ms Sharma was fired in May 2017.  This was after she had arranged for mediation between her clients and IHC, then telling her clients she would not be attending.

Sharma v. Foster-Bohm & Corbin – High Court (3.11.22)

22.181