Air New Zealand has looked at plans to curb access to its Koru lounge because of overcrowding (audio from July 2019).

OPINION: Anjela Sharma is a Nelson-based lawyer and, according to her court filings, she travels around the country regularly for work and training as well as pleasure, including visiting some of her six children in Dunedin and Invercargill.

At least she did, until Air New Zealand banned her from its flights in July of last year.

That same month, Sharma petitioned the High Court in Auckland to intervene and direct the airline to immediately remove the 12-month ban. Last week, the court refused her request.

According to the airline the kind of bad behaviour that precipitated Sharma's ban is on the rise (its court filings described her as "intimidating, threatening and abusive").

READ MORE:

* Air New Zealand denying customers Koru lounge access due to 'exceptionally heavy demand'

* Air New Zealand's clap back heard around Aotearoa

* Lawyer takes legal action against Air New Zealand after ban imposed

For last year, the national carrier reported a rise in such bans of 60 per cent over 2018. The prohibitions run from one year to five years; Air New Zealand won't release the actual number of cases.

JOE LLOYD/STUFF Air New Zealand banned Nelson lawyer Anjela Sharma from its flights last year.

It is clear that Air New Zealand wields a very big stick in banning customers from its flights. In some of the country's regions the national flag carrier and its domestic subsidiary are the only game in town.

In Sharma's home of Nelson, the competition is limited: Origin Air's schedule is very slim and Sounds Air's largest planes are bumpy 12-seaters. Neither fly direct, or even with connecting flights to Auckland.

As such, it's crucial that heavyweight Air New Zealand use bans sparingly and only after delivering fair warning to recalcitrant customers. In the Sharma case, that looks to be exactly what happened.

Judge Paul Davison's judgment lingers on the chain of events that precipitated the prohibition.

On December 1, 2018, Sharma and her family used first the Koru lounge in Nelson and later the Koru lounge in Wellington, although, as a group, their tickets (ultimately taking them internationally on Singapore Airlines with a mix of business class and premium economy fares) didn't entitle them to. Sharma and her husband were Koru Club members, while their children were not.

The judgment quotes Air New Zealand's subsequent warning letter to Sharma: "[in Nelson] lounge staff advised that you and your family did not meet the Lounge terms and conditions of entry. However, you and your family subsequently entered the Lounge without permission.

"Upon entry, you and your family displayed loud and aggressive behaviour which was unacceptable, inappropriate and upsetting for our Air New Zealand staff and other passengers."

Staff at the Wellington Koru Lounge cite similar behaviour.

MARTIN DE RUYTER Air NZ wields a very big stick in banning customers; the Anjela Sharma case shows it does so very cautiously.

Air New Zealand reports note Sharma and members of her family were "very loud, disruptive, and intimidating during their dealings with the Lounge hostess and over their entitlement to use the lounge."

Members of the family, a report says, called the lounge hostess stupid and racist, and mocked and loudly mimicked her voice.

Those were not the first incidents that caused the airline to write up difficult interactions with Sharma, but they triggered a letter from the airline that warned Sharma of consequences that, if she didn't change her behaviour in the future, could result in an outright ban.

A series of subsequent dealings with the carrier, cited in the judgment, including reducing an Air New Zealand staff member to tears and then accusing her of faking them, ultimately led to the ban.

To be clear, the court ruling and lengthy judgment does not resolve "disputed factual issues" in the case. But it does highlight that Air New Zealand's contract with customers allows it to decline service for a wide range of reasons, including conduct.

And it does "give weight to factual matters where there is no dispute or where evidence is obviously cogent and reliable". It quotes at length from the airline's internal employee reports of incidents.

What emerges is a picture of a corporation that took front-line staff reports and weighed them against Sharma's correspondence at a removed and senior level. It is also clear that Air New Zealand staff are not the only ones who've been intimidated by Sharma.

LUZ ZUNIGA In Sharma's home of Nelson, the number of available airlines is limited.

Stoke Veterinary Hospital near Nelson, where Sharma was a customer, also took the extraordinary step of banning her over events in late 2017.

"We are able to confirm that we did advise Angela Sharma that we would not continue to provide veterinary services to her from our business at Stoke Veterinary Hospital due to her behavior towards our staff members," Dr Callum Irvine, veterinary operations manager, said by email.

Staff at nearby Waimea College, who asked not to be named because they were not authorised to speak, also said Sharma's dealings with the school have been very difficult. Last year, some teachers were advised to have no substantive conversations with Sharma's year 13 son "without his lawyer present, meaning his mother", one source said.

Principal Scott Haines was not immediately available for comment.

Sharma was a parent representative on the Waimea College Board of Trustees until last May. In 2019 she also ran unsuccessfully for a spot on Nelson City Council.

Sources say Sharma has also been issued a trespass notice by Nelson College. Acting Headmaster Tim Tucker said he wasn't prepared to "make any comment in relation to Anjela Sharma".

Contacted for comment on Wednesday by Stuff, Sharma asked to speak off the record. Stuff declined.

She called the vet's ban "a lie" and asked again to speak off the record. Stuff declined. At this point Sharma called the phone call unprofessional and said she would "make a report".

The one thing she did confirm is that she's still considering all her legal options.