New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

New Zealand Case Law

International covenant on civil and political rights

  • 9 Apr 2019

    WHICHMAN v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2019] NZHC 747

    Citation
    [2019] NZHC 747
    Court
    High Court

    The warrant was valid because it explicitly remanded the applicant for the period of the adjournment and thus provided lawful authority for detention; typographical or outcome-notation errors in the warrant do not invalidate detention; complaints about placement or conditions of detention (including segregation from convicted prisoners) are matters for judicial review, not for habeas corpus, and repeat applications raising substantially the same issues may be dismissed.

    • Habeas corpus
    • Judicial review
    • Detention law
    • Prisoner segregation
    • International covenant on civil and political rights
    • New zealand bill of rights act 1990

  • 1 Jun 2018

    WHICHMAN v DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2018] NZHC 1296

    Citation
    [2018] NZHC 1296
    Court
    High Court

    Because the applicant's detention follows a valid conviction and sentence, habeas corpus is not the proper remedy to challenge either the conviction or the conditions of detention; challenges to solitary confinement and related conditions should be pursued by judicial review, and therefore the habeas corpus application must be dismissed.

    • Habeas corpus
    • Solitary confinement
    • Lawful detention
    • New zealand bill of rights act
    • International covenant on civil and political rights

  • 29 May 2007

    BEL AND KAO V THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR HC WN CIV 2006 485 865

    Citation
    openlaw-d6a64cb2_90ec_4563_ad10_68effee8ff69.pdf
    Court
    High Court

    The High Court held the Removal Review Authority did not err in law: there was no breach of Articles 17, 23 or 24 of the ICCPR or Article 3 of the CRC; the Authority properly interpreted and applied s47(3) and reasonably concluded no exceptional circumstances existed to render removal unjust or unduly harsh; appeal dismissed.

    • S47 exceptional circumstances
    • Removal review authority
    • International covenant on civil and political rights
    • Convention on the rights of the child
    • Best interests of the child
    • Interpretation of domestic law consistent with international obligations

  • 28 Nov 2006

    MENZIES V R SC 80/2006

    Citation
    SC 80/2006
    Court
    Supreme Court

    The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the proposed appeal had no prospect of success and it was not necessary in the interests of justice, so s 13 of the Supreme Court Act 2003 was not satisfied.

    • Drug offences
    • Misuse of drugs act 1975
    • Leave to appeal
    • International covenant on civil and political rights