DENNIS HAUNUI v R [2020] NZSC 41
Leave to appeal was granted and the Supreme Court framed the single approved question for determination: whether the Court of Appeal ought to have allowed the applicant's appeal; the Court required submissions to specifically address the impact, if any, of the omission of the proviso from s 232 on appellate review...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] NZSC 41
- Parties
- Applicant: Dennis Haunui; Respondent: The Queen
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 30 April 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Leave Granted
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Standard of Appellate Review, Statutory Proviso Omission
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Dennis Haunui
Applicant
The Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave Granted
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Court of Appeal ought to have allowed the applicant's appeal
- 2 Whether the omission of the proviso formerly in s 385 Crimes Act 1961 from s 232 Criminal Procedure Act 2011 affects the appellate review approach
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was granted and the Supreme Court framed the single approved question for determination: whether the Court of Appeal ought to have allowed the applicant's appeal; the Court required submissions to specifically address the impact, if any, of the omission of the proviso from s 232 on appellate review as discussed in Wiley v R.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted
Orders
- Leave to appeal granted (Haunui v R [2019] NZCA 679)
- Approved question: whether the Court of Appeal ought to have allowed the applicant's appeal to that Court
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
DENNIS HAUNUI v R [2020] NZSC 41 [30 April 2020]IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALANDI TE KŌTI MANA NUISC 6/2020[2020] NZSC 41BETWEEN DENNIS HAUNUIApplicantAND THE QUEENRespondentCourt: William Young, O'Regan and Williams JJCounsel: A J Bailey for ApplicantJ Mara for RespondentJudgment: 30 April 2020JUDGMENT OF THE COURTA Leave to appeal is granted (Haunui v R [2019] NZCA 679).B The approved question is whether the Court of Appealought to have allowed the applicant's appeal to that Court.____________________________________________________________________REASONS[1] In addition to the points raised in the leave submissions, counsel's submissionsshould address the conclusion of the Court of Appeal in Wiley v R that the omission ofthe proviso formerly set out in s 385 of the Crimes Act 1961 from s 232 of the CriminalProcedure Act 2011 did not point to any change in the approach to appellate review.1Solicitors:Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent1 Wiley v R [2016] NZCA 28, [2016] 3 NZLR 1 at [42]–[55].