14 Mar 2023
SYED v MALIK & ANOR [2023] NZHC 496
- Citation
- [2023] NZHC 496
- Court
- High Court
The Judge found both s16(4)(a) and s16(4)(b) thresholds met: the defendants' proposed mitigation amounted to a mixed question of law and fact resembling a truth defence that a jury could not be expected to confine to quantum alone, and the case involved prolonged examination (20 publications, ~200 statements, complex cross‑jurisdictional business records and Urdu evidence) that could not conveniently be tried with a jury; on balance the court exercised its discretion to order the issue of quantum be tried by a judge alone.