New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Iccpr

Legal area

Court

6 Mar 2019

AO (Cameroon) v A REFUGEE AND PROTECTION OFFICER [2019] NZHC 360

Citation

[2019] NZHC 360
Court

High Court

Leave to appeal and leave to bring judicial review were refused because the Tribunal's credibility and factual findings had an available evidential basis, the expert and country evidence relied upon were either predicated on facts the Tribunal rejected or inapplicable on the facts as found, and the statutory thresholds for leave (no question of law of general or public importance nor exceptional individual injustice) were not met.
28 Sept 2018

AA (ZIMBABWE) & ANOR v REFUGEE AND PROTECTION OFFICER [2018] NZHC 2523

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2523
Court

High Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicants failed to demonstrate any seriously arguable error of law; the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings and factual assessments were supported by evidence and country material, and the peripheral challenges and additional evidence did not show errors of fact so grave as to amount to errors of law under s245.
13 Aug 2018

YOUNG v ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2018] NZCA 307

Citation

[2018] 3 NZLR 827
Court

Court of Appeal

State immunity bars the claim against the MOD(UK); NZBORA does not apply to the MOD(UK) or expand liability to foreign states; treaties and customary international law relied upon do not create a procedural exception displacing state immunity; England and Wales is the appropriate forum for the MOD(UK) claims; appeal dismissed.
21 Sept 2016

KIM v THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2016] NZHC 2235

Citation

[2016] NZHC 2235
Court

High Court

The High Court had jurisdiction to reconsider bail because the materially changed circumstances — principally the cumulative effect of over five years' detention and subsequent events — made fresh consideration appropriate; balancing the substantial flight risk against oppressive delay and mitigating measures, the Court granted bail subject to stringent electronic monitoring and prohibitions on travel.
19 Nov 2015

BZ (SRI LANKA) v THE IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION TRIBUNAL OF AUCKLAND [2015] NZHC 2883

Citation

[2015] NZHC 2883
Court

High Court

Leave to commence judicial review out of time was denied because the applicant failed to demonstrate special circumstances under s 247(1) Immigration Act 2009 (six month delay not justified by asserted mental health, language or financial barriers), and although a procedural fairness issue (exclusion during wife's telephone evidence) was arguable, it was not of general or public importance and there was no substantive unfairness; accordingly leave under s 249 was refused.
2 Jun 2011

ELLIS v R SC 53/2011

Citation

SC 53/2011
Court

Supreme Court

The application for leave was dismissed because the jury was selected in accordance with the Juries Act 1981 and no unfairness or discriminatory effect was demonstrated; statutory compliance and the absence of a plausible alternative interpretation meant the Bill of Rights, Magna Carta and ICCPR arguments could not succeed.
2 Aug 2010

KEVIN RAYMOND BANKS V THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL CA101/2010

Citation

openlaw-81635908_0d15_475d_b52e_f1b0337cde98.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The Registrar's refusal to waive security for costs was correct because the applicant failed to provide evidence of impecuniosity or of exceptional public interest; the underlying appeal lacks arguable merit on its facts due to earlier findings that the claims are statute-barred, and therefore the security amount fixed ($3,555) should stand and be paid within 20 working days.

New Zealand Case Law

AO (Cameroon) v A REFUGEE AND PROTECTION OFFICER [2019] NZHC 360

AA (ZIMBABWE) & ANOR v REFUGEE AND PROTECTION OFFICER [2018] NZHC 2523

YOUNG v ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2018] NZCA 307

KIM v THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2016] NZHC 2235

BZ (SRI LANKA) v THE IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION TRIBUNAL OF AUCKLAND [2015] NZHC 2883

ELLIS v R SC 53/2011

KEVIN RAYMOND BANKS V THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL CA101/2010