New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Interim detention order

Legal area

Court

4 Sept 2023

PORI v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2023] NZCA 407 [30 August 2023]

Citation

[2023] NZCA 407
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held that while the Chief Executive must consider the appropriateness of applications under ss 45 or 29 following a s 12(2) direction, the Court has no power to compel the Chief Executive to make such an application; however, if the Chief Executive decides to continue with a PPO application the Chief Executive must provide the Court with reasons in sufficient detail to justify proceeding, and where such explanation was provided the High Court may lawfully determine the PPO—therefore the appeal was dismissed.
24 Aug 2023

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v WAITI [2023] NZHC 2310

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2310
Court

High Court

On provisional evaluation the respondent met the s13(2) behavioural criteria and posed a very high risk of imminent serious violent offending such that an IDO was justified. However, the court was not satisfied that detention in prison was justified because Matawhāiti is a purpose-built, more controlled residence with systems and trained staff capable of managing the risk and it had not been shown that all less restrictive options had been tried; accordingly the IDO was made to detain the respondent at Matawhāiti commencing on his release date.
3 Sept 2021

CHIEF EXECUTIVE, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v PORI [2021] NZHC 2305

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2305
Court

High Court

Respondent satisfies s13(1) and s13(2) behavioural criteria and poses a very high risk of imminent serious sexual offending; no less restrictive legal option is adequate because respondent's condition is not amenable to treatment, no existing forensic mental health facility can safely and effectively manage him without recreating Matawhāiti's restrictive environment, therefore s12 direction is declined and a PPO is required and made to protect public safety.
25 Jun 2020

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v PORI [2020] NZHC 1446 [25 June 2020]

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1446
Court

High Court

On the provisional evidence the respondent met the s7 eligibility and s13 behavioural criteria and posed a very high and imminent risk of serious sexual offending; less restrictive options must be considered and tried before ordering prison detention; Matawhāiti had not been tried and was ordered as the appropriate location for the interim detention order starting 25 June 2020; the court directed consideration of mental health or intellectual disability statutory applications and listed the substantive PPO for further hearing on 3 August 2020.
30 Oct 2019

DEPUTY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v McCORKINDALE [2019] NZHC 2771

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2771
Court

High Court

The court held there is no jurisdiction to use s107(3) of the Public Safety Act to suspend an interim detention order in order to impose an alternative 24/7 intensive supervision regime that cannot lawfully be imposed under the Parole Act; reliance on consent is legally inadequate and the IDO must therefore remain in full force pending determination of the PPO application.
27 Apr 2017

CHIEF EXECUTIVE, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v MCINTOSH [2017] NZHC 793

Citation

[2017] NZHC 793
Court

High Court

The Court approved withdrawal of the PPO application because the Parole Board had varied the respondent's ESO to impose conditions that sufficiently addressed the Chief Executive's public protection concerns; accordingly the proceedings were ordered discontinued effective upon commencement of those amended ESO conditions and the interim detention order was discharged on that contingency; the Court permanently sealed the file because of the sensitive nature of materials filed by the applicant and personal information provided by the respondent.
14 Feb 2017

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v CAMPBELL [2017] NZHC 147

Citation

[2017] NZHC 147
Court

High Court

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to impose the special intensive monitoring condition sought under the Parole Act because only the Parole Board can impose special conditions and the Court may only order intensive monitoring when imposing an extended supervision order; accordingly the Court could not make the requested order and the substantive proceedings were adjourned with an agreed interim monitoring arrangement until the hearing date.
13 Feb 2017

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v KERR [2017] NZHC 139

Citation

[2017] NZHC 139
Court

High Court

The High Court does not have jurisdiction to impose the special intensive monitoring condition on an existing extended supervision order; only the Parole Board can impose special conditions but it cannot itself impose intensive monitoring without a High Court order and the High Court may make that order only when simultaneously imposing an extended supervision order, therefore the Court adjourned the applications and declined to impose the proposed special conditions at this stage.
27 Jul 2016

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v CHISNALL [2016] NZHC 1725

Citation

[2016] NZHC 1725
Court

High Court

The Court held it possesses an inherent jurisdiction to award costs in respect of statutory applications under the PSA and need not characterise the proceedings as civil or criminal to do so; the High Court Rules are an appropriate proxy for calculating costs on an interlocutory application and the defendant was entitled to an award of costs at the specified rate.
1 Jun 2016

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v LLOYD ALEXANDER MCINTOSH [2016] NZHC 1163

Citation

[2016] NZHC 1163
Court

High Court

The Court has jurisdiction to make an interim detention order under s 107 where the ESO's intensive monitoring condition will expire before the PPO can be determined; the statutory preconditions were met and the evidence (including health assessor reports) justified making an interim detention order which the Court properly suspended on specified conditions that maintain the existing intensive monitoring and ESO conditions pending final determination of the PPO.