New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Relationship evidence

Legal area

Court

12 May 2023

W (SC 120/2022) v R [2023] NZSC 50

Citation

[2023] NZSC 50
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the relationship evidence was properly admissible in context, the trial Judge's general prejudice/sympathy directions and reliability warning were adequate, and the omission of a more tailored direction did not give rise to a real risk of miscarriage of justice; consideration of trial counsel's position is permissible contextual material but not determinative of appellate review.
26 Sept 2019

K (SC 70/2019) v R [2019] NZSC 102

Citation

[2019] NZSC 102
Court

Supreme Court

An extension of time to seek leave was granted because the short unopposed delay did not prejudice the Crown; leave was refused because the Court of Appeal had correctly analysed the relationship evidence as admissible contextual propensity evidence under the Evidence Act and the absence of a specific propensity/relationship direction did not produce a miscarriage of justice given the direct relevance of the evidence, the Crown's explanation to the jury, the self-evident limitations of the evidence, and the trial judge's summing up focus.
27 Jun 2019

K (CA445/2018) v R [2019] NZCA 264

Citation

[2019] NZCA 264
Court

Court of Appeal

The impugned relationship evidence was admissible as contextual and probative of complainant's behaviour and delay; trial counsel's decisions were within reasonable trial strategy and did not produce a real risk of miscarriage; omission of a specific direction did not render the verdict unsafe given the structure of the summing up and the direct focus on complainant's sexual allegations; therefore convictions were safe and appeal dismissed.
19 Mar 2018

R v COE [2018] NZHC 502

Citation

[2018] NZHC 502
Court

High Court

The April 2017 offending and prior conduct were admissible as relationship propensity evidence because they demonstrated a recurring pattern of possessive, intoxication-linked violence toward the same complainant that was directly relevant to intent, credibility and the kidnapping allegation; the probative value was high and outweighed any unfair prejudice, which could be mitigated by an agreed statement of facts and standard propensity directions under s43 Evidence Act 2006.

New Zealand Case Law

W (SC 120/2022) v R [2023] NZSC 50

K (SC 70/2019) v R [2019] NZSC 102

K (CA445/2018) v R [2019] NZCA 264

R v COE [2018] NZHC 502