New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Transcript access

Legal area

Court

21 Apr 2023

TANYA FELICITY DUNSTAN v ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2023] NZSC 39

Citation

[2023] NZSC 39
Court

Supreme Court

The recall application is dismissed because the grounds advanced do not fall within the limited, exceptional categories permitting recall: the subsequent Court of Appeal decision and the asserted new evidence are irrelevant to the leave issues, no clear procedural or substantive error producing a miscarriage of justice is shown, and the application impermissibly seeks to relitigate the leave judgment.
26 Mar 2020

BURCHELL v POLICE [2020] NZHC 652

Citation

[2020] NZHC 652
Court

High Court

The appeal hearing was brought forward to 6 April 2020 but the home detention was not suspended because the appellant pleaded guilty, his allegations of coercion and misconduct lacked independent corroboration, the grounds of appeal appeared weak on the material before the court, and the interests of justice did not require suspension pending the expedited hearing.
11 Feb 2020

TE MONI v POLICE [2020] NZHC 119

Citation

[2020] NZHC 119
Court

High Court

Refusal of the transcript application because no written transcript existed and the Rules do not require creation of non-existent documents; resource implications and precedent counsel against ordering transcription; applicant failed to show the high threshold required by s 237 Criminal Procedure Act 2011 (no miscarriage of justice or matter of general/public importance), so there was no interest of justice to justify transcription.
21 Dec 2018

WIKI v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZCA 631

Citation

[2018] NZCA 631
Court

Court of Appeal

Leave to appeal was declined because the applicant's guilty plea and acceptance of the facts deprived the conviction appeal of real prospects of success, the sentencing was within proper discretion and plainly available to the sentencing judge, the applicant failed to demonstrate a matter of general or public importance or a miscarriage of justice, and refusal to provide a transcript was not unlawful or unreasonable.
20 Sept 2011

MISIUK V CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS COA CA491/2011

Citation

COA CA491/2011
Court

Court of Appeal

The extension of time was dismissed because the applicant provided no sufficient reason for an approximate ten-month delay and had been put on notice of the time limits; the proposed appeal is an abuse of process and moot in light of intervening convictions and warrants, and raises no question of public importance or prospect of practical relief, so extension is refused.

New Zealand Case Law

TANYA FELICITY DUNSTAN v ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2023] NZSC 39

BURCHELL v POLICE [2020] NZHC 652

TE MONI v POLICE [2020] NZHC 119

WIKI v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZCA 631

MISIUK V CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS COA CA491/2011