New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Leave to prosecute

Legal area

Court

31 Mar 2021

ZHANG v DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON [2021] NZHC 703

Citation

[2021] NZHC 703
Court

High Court

The Judge found both proceedings were plainly an abuse of process because the statements of claim failed to identify a reviewable decision or grounds, disclosed no cause of action, contained diffuse and unsworn material incapable of supporting a prosecution or judicial review, and were incapable of meaningful amendment; accordingly both proceedings were struck out under r 5.35B of the High Court Rules.
5 Oct 2007

BURGESS V FIELD HC AK CIV 2007-404-3206

Citation

openlaw-445e479d_cf7f_46d9_9c59_767475977a43.pdf
Court

High Court

For the purposes of s 103(1) Crimes Act 1961 the prosecution must prove that the MP accepted a bribe (including gratuitous or below‑market services) in respect of acts in his capacity as an MP and that he acted 'corruptly' defined as deliberately accepting the benefit knowing or believing it was intended to influence or reward him; on the evidence before the Court that test is met to grant leave to prosecute.
6 Jul 2007

BURGESS V FIELD HC AK CIV 2007-404-3206

Citation

openlaw-e4293dd4_e31b_464b_b23e_aa3f8313457f.pdf
Court

High Court

Leave under s103(3) requires the High Court to perform a non‑trivial screening exercise: the applicant must present evidence showing the prosecution is proper and in good faith and there are no obvious legal or evidential defects or improper motives; this standard is higher than mere reasonable suspicion but lower than the committal requirement of evidence sufficient to put the defendant on trial.

New Zealand Case Law

ZHANG v DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON [2021] NZHC 703

BURGESS V FIELD HC AK CIV 2007-404-3206

BURGESS V FIELD HC AK CIV 2007-404-3206