New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Nzbora

Legal area

Court

10 Jul 2023

MOORE v R [2023] NZCA 286

Citation

[2023] NZCA 286
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court allowed the appeal and quashed preventive detention because, applying s87(4) correctly and recognising that the existing ESO will be reactivated and can be strengthened with stringent special conditions focused on monitoring and rehabilitation, a determinate sentence of 26 months plus an active ESO provides adequate protection; the High Court erred in concluding the ESO was of no effect and that only preventive detention would protect the community, making preventive detention disproportionate in the circumstances.
27 Aug 2020

BOON GUNN HONG v NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2020] NZHC 2205

Citation

[2020] NZHC 2205
Court

High Court

Causes of action 1, 2 and 3(1) are struck out as they amount to collateral attacks on the High Court's appellate judgment and therefore disclose no reasonably arguable cause of action and are an abuse of process/vexatious; cause 3(2) (systemic discrimination/bad faith) is insufficiently particularised but not a total write-off, plaintiff given leave to re-plead limited to specified directions; costs awarded to second respondents on a 2B basis (direction given for memoranda timetable).
21 Jul 2020

NEW ZEALAND POLICE v BURROWS [2020] NZHC 1755

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1755
Court

High Court

The High Court held that on the facts Judge Mill was correct: Mr Burrows was not "in custody" when the s 38 report was ordered on 27 July 2017 and the CPMIP Act process initiated without jurisdiction had caused unjustifiable delay; that delay was undue and a stay of the prosecution was the appropriate remedy; the appeal was dismissed.
29 May 2020

WRIGHT v THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2020] NZHC 1166

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1166
Court

High Court

The primary rule that lay litigants are not entitled to recover costs prevents the court from creating a special category of costs awards for self-represented litigants or from awarding a mathematical credit derived from scale costs; interlocutory successes should be recorded and may be taken into account by the judge fixing final costs rather than quantified as an immediate offset, and in the specific applications the appropriate outcome is no order as to costs for the defendants' security and review applications with certain interlocutory costs to lie where they fall and interlocutory succe…
18 Dec 2019

PRESCOTT v POLICE [2019] NZHC 3376

Citation

[2019] NZHC 3376
Court

High Court

Appeal dismissed and judicial review dismissed: arrest was lawful because objectively the officer had good cause to suspect Prescott was obstructing police in the execution of duty (s 23 Summary Offences Act) even though s 116 LTA did not apply on the facts; reasons for arrest were given, detention length was not arbitrary, right to counsel was offered, and allegations of judicial bias and tampering were not established.
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.
14 Sept 2018

SINGH v IMMIGRATION & PROTECTION TRIBUNAL [2018] NZHC 2409

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2409
Court

High Court

Leave to appeal and leave to bring judicial review were refused because the applicant failed to identify a question of law capable of bona fide and serious argument and of general or public importance; the Tribunal applied the correct legal tests and its factual findings were supported by the evidence so did not meet the high threshold under Taafi; there was no breach of natural justice or actionable discrimination warranting review.
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.
23 Feb 2018

BR (BANGLADESH) v IPT & MBIE [2018] NZHC 234

Citation

[2018] NZHC 234
Court

High Court

Leave to appeal and to bring judicial review was refused because the applicants failed to identify any legal error of general or public importance: the Tribunal lawfully found exceptional humanitarian circumstances but separately and permissibly concluded deportation would not be unjust or unduly harsh; the applicants' challenges were to factual and evaluative findings which do not meet the statutory leave thresholds.
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.