New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Admissibility of prior statements

Legal area

Court

22 Aug 2019

BODY v R [2019] NZCA 378

Citation

[2019] NZCA 378
Court

Court of Appeal

The formal police statement was admissible: portions consistent with the complainant's evidence properly received under s35(2) and portions covering matters she could not recall admissible under s90(7) because the statement was reliable and supplied missing memory; the retraction letter and notebook statement did not produce unfair prejudice; the Judge's direct questioning and failure to invite parties to ask follow-up questions under s100 was an error but harmless because it elicited evidence already given and did not create a real risk of miscarriage; accordingly the convictions stand and t…
1 Sept 2017

SHAW v BANKS [2017] NZHC 2125

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2125
Court

High Court

On the balance of probabilities the evidence established that defendant had a sexual relationship with the mother at relevant time, later resumed contact when the child was young, made acknowledgements consistent with paternity, third‑party evidence and photographs supported likeness, and defendant's refusal to undergo DNA testing permitted an adverse inference; accordingly court declared defendant to be the father.
27 Jul 2017

WHITE v R [2017] NZCA 322

Citation

[2017] NZCA 322
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the trial judge did not err in admitting and putting to the jury the prior statements of hostile witnesses or in his directions and procedural handling, that no mistrial was required, that party liability and claim of right directions were adequate when read as a whole, and that the sentence and EM bail discount were within the judge's available discretion; accordingly the convictions and sentence appeals were dismissed except as to time extensions noted.
18 Nov 2015

SHANE JAMES OLD v R [2015] NZSC 175

Citation

[2015] NZSC 175
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the issues did not raise questions of general or public importance nor a real risk of substantial miscarriage of justice: the victim was not 'unavailable' under s 18 as he could give evidence on relevant matters and the identifying statements were made shortly after the assault to multiple people, and the prosecutor's use of the written statement in examination was permissible.
7 Jul 2010

SINGH V R SC 42/2010

Citation

SINGH V R SC 42/2010
Court

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and identified the specific grounds for the appeal so that the questions about the applicability of the privilege against self-incrimination and the admissibility of the complainant's statements can be determined on appeal; no determination on the merits was made.

New Zealand Case Law

BODY v R [2019] NZCA 378

SHAW v BANKS [2017] NZHC 2125

WHITE v R [2017] NZCA 322

SHANE JAMES OLD v R [2015] NZSC 175

SINGH V R SC 42/2010