New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Abortion law

Legal area

Court

6 Dec 2021

NZ HEALTH PROFESSIONALS ALLIANCE INC v ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2021] NZHC 3322

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3322
Court

High Court

Although the plaintiff raised novel and tenable NZBORA issues and conducted the proceedings reasonably, the claim ultimately concerned the individual conscientious objection of members, the challenged provisions were plain and had been considered in the legislative process, and the s5 justification was likely to succeed; accordingly the court reduced the usual costs order modestly and ordered the plaintiff to pay $25,000 plus disbursements rather than the full 2B amount of $37,032.87.
15 May 2017

N v PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF NEW ZEALAND [2017] NZHC 984

Citation

[2017] NZHC 984
Court

High Court

The Court refused the request because the confidentiality and privacy interests of patients and the existence of permanent suppression orders outweighed the police's unsupported investigatory interest; the police failed to show a proper and specific need to override suppression, regulatory bodies had not referred the matter to police, and no persuasive evidence was provided to justify disclosure of Dr N's identity.
1 Oct 2015

RIGHT TO LIFE NEW ZEALAND INC v THE ABORTION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE [2015] NZHC 2393

Citation

[2015] NZHC 2393
Court

High Court

The Court held RTL had standing to seek declarations. The word 'or' in the definition of abortion in the CSA Act is disjunctive so the Committee may lawfully grant limited licences authorising medical abortions only where the licence and application so provide and safety requirements are met. However s 19(3)'s mandatory phrase 'only during the first 12 weeks of the pregnancy' prescribes 12 weeks as the legally correct temporal limit for limited licences and the Committee acted ultra vires in renewing licences using a nine week formulation; those nine-week words are severable and the correct l…
2 Dec 2010

HALLAGAN AND ANOR V MEDICAL COUNCIL OF NZ HC WN CIV-2010-485-222

Citation

openlaw-246089a2_b10c_46a7_9b1e_114d4355cb86.pdf
Court

High Court

A doctor consulted under s32(1) who has a conscientious objection has two lawful options: (a) decline to arrange for the case to be considered and give the s174(2) information (this statutory duty is a maximum and cannot be expanded by professional standards), or (b) if conscience allows, arrange for the case to be referred and comply with professional standards; s46 does not by itself exempt a doctor from s32(1) responsibilities but s174 permits a conscientious practitioner to refuse arranging and instead give information; a doctor who undertakes the statutory task of consideration cannot pa…
9 Jun 2008

RIGHT TO LIFE NEW ZEALAND INC V THE ABORTION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE HC WN CIV 2005-485-999

Citation

openlaw-64663901_0d39_4ffc_a83b_08212faa794a.pdf
Court

High Court

The abortion law does not confer or recognise a legal right to life for the unborn child and s8 NZBORA does not apply to the unborn; however Parliament has recognised the unborn child's moral claim by statutory criteria and procedures (s187A and CSA Act). The Abortion Supervisory Committee must keep the abortion law and its operation (including administration of s187A) under review, may require records and reports from certifying consultants under s36 and may take steps including non-reappointment or removal of consultants to ensure consistency of administration, but it may not intervene to r…

New Zealand Case Law

NZ HEALTH PROFESSIONALS ALLIANCE INC v ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2021] NZHC 3322

N v PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF NEW ZEALAND [2017] NZHC 984

RIGHT TO LIFE NEW ZEALAND INC v THE ABORTION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE [2015] NZHC 2393

HALLAGAN AND ANOR V MEDICAL COUNCIL OF NZ HC WN CIV-2010-485-222

RIGHT TO LIFE NEW ZEALAND INC V THE ABORTION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE HC WN CIV 2005-485-999