New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 76 evidence act 2006

Legal area

Court

28 Nov 2017

THOMAS HOGAN PARKER V R [2017] NZCA 550

Citation

[2017] NZCA 550
Court

Court of Appeal

The juror's post-trial expression of concern, by itself, did not establish the exceptional circumstances required by s76(3) because there was no suggestion of exposure to extraneous material or interference with deliberations and precedent shows minority juror dissatisfaction typically does not justify breaching jury confidentiality; accordingly the application to appoint independent counsel was declined.
29 Mar 2017

SMITH v R [2017] NZCA 93

Citation

[2017] NZCA 93
Court

Court of Appeal

Extension of time to appeal granted to enable consideration of merits, but application to appoint independent counsel/private investigator to interview jurors declined because the evidence did not show the jury received highly prejudicial extraneous information and did not meet the exceptional circumstances threshold under s 76 Evidence Act 2006; knowledge of uncalled character evidence was not shown to be capable of affecting the verdicts in light of trial directions and mixed verdicts.
27 Apr 2012

PEARSON v R SC 125/2011

Citation

SC 125/2011
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to show that the Court of Appeal's conclusion — that there were insufficient grounds to interview a juror under s 76 Evidence Act 2006 — could give rise to a miscarriage of justice or that any other ground for granting leave existed.
12 Dec 2011

WHARTON v R SC 110/2011

Citation

SC 110/2011
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was denied because the statutory process for majority verdicts was followed and the alleged juror concerns could not overcome the prohibition in s 76 Evidence Act 2006; additionally the point was not raised in the Court of Appeal and thus could not be raised for the first time in this Court.

New Zealand Case Law

THOMAS HOGAN PARKER V R [2017] NZCA 550

SMITH v R [2017] NZCA 93

PEARSON v R SC 125/2011

WHARTON v R SC 110/2011