New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Fair hearing

Legal area

Court

27 Apr 2022

JD v A PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE [2022] NZHC 826

Citation

[2022] NZHC 826
Court

High Court

The appellant was granted leave to give evidence on appeal because the evidence related to alleged procedural unfairness and was not new evidence on the substantive issues; the application for non-party discovery was declined because there is no statutory or rules basis to order such discovery on appeal absent exceptional circumstances and no exceptional circumstances or identified probative documents were shown.
2 Dec 2020

MURRAY v WEST COAST HOLDINGS LIMITED [2020] NZCA 611

Citation

[2020] NZCA 611
Court

Court of Appeal

The application for an extension of time was declined because, although the applicant satisfactorily explained the delay and prejudice to respondent was minimal, the proposed appeal had no real prospect of success: the evidence showed no binding compromise was ever agreed, the third bankruptcy notice was validly served and not complied with, and the High Court's adjudication was legally and factually justified; thus the interests of justice did not require granting an extension.
23 May 2011

CLIFFORD LAMAR LIMITED V GYENGE COA CA147/2011

Citation

COA CA147/2011
Court

Court of Appeal

The application for leave was dismissed because it raised primarily factual challenges and credibility issues which do not constitute questions of law under s 214; the applicant failed to meet the high threshold required to show no evidentiary basis for the Employment Court's findings, and procedural complaints were either not raised below or were matters for which the applicant had available remedies (eg subpoenas, inclusion in the agreed bundle).
3 Oct 2005

WILLIS V NEW ZEALAND POLICE HC AK CIV 2005-404-267

Citation

openlaw-d09fd25c_9908_46eb_af8a_a2eaa0b56eb0.pdf
Court

High Court

The appeal is allowed because the Justices' reasons indicate a real risk of misdirection on the burden of proof and no clear adverse credibility finding against the appellant; as a result the conviction was unsafe and is set aside.
27 Aug 2003

J G RUSSELL AND ORS V TAXATION REVIEW AUTHORITY And Anor CA CA188/02

Citation

openlaw-9b77a89d_b971_45b6_920e_298f3a8ef7fc.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held that allegations of misconduct by the Commissioner in TRA proceedings, absent a challenged decision by the TRA, do not give rise to a judicial review cause of action under s27 NZBORA or s6 Tax Administration Act against the Commissioner as a litigant; the Scally principle does not extend to civil tax objection proceedings; the primacy and procedural rules of the TRA govern fairness and discovery; accordingly the pleaded cause of action against the Commissioner was untenable and was struck out and the appeal dismissed.

New Zealand Case Law

JD v A PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE [2022] NZHC 826

MURRAY v WEST COAST HOLDINGS LIMITED [2020] NZCA 611

CLIFFORD LAMAR LIMITED V GYENGE COA CA147/2011

WILLIS V NEW ZEALAND POLICE HC AK CIV 2005-404-267

J G RUSSELL AND ORS V TAXATION REVIEW AUTHORITY And Anor CA CA188/02