Supreme Court of New Zealand Wellington
SC 18/2013; [2015] NZSC 98
3, 4 March; 7 July 2015
Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold and O’Regan JJ
SC 18/2013; [2015] NZSC 98
3, 4 March; 7 July 2015
Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold and O’Regan JJ
Constitutional law — New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 — Remedies — Whether and when reduction in sentence appropriate remedy for breach of rights — Whether and when stay of prosecution appropriate remedy for breach of rights.
Criminal practice and procedure — Search warrants — Warrant for production of recordings of telephone calls by prisoner — Failure by officer applying to tell issuing officer that calls to lawyer included in material sought — Failure to make provision for handling privileged material — Whether warrants rendered invalid.
Criminal practice and procedure — Sentence — Reduction in sentence for breach of defendant’s rights — Whether and when appropriate.
Criminal practice and procedure — Stay of proceedings — Breaches of solicitor/client privilege — No evidence relevant to charges obtained — Whether rebuttable presumption of prejudice and that proceedings should be stayed — Whether there had been prejudice to defence — Whether sufficient connection between breaches and trial.
Evidence — Privilege — Legal professional privilege — Recordings of calls by prisoner to lawyer and to relatives — Discussion with relatives of matters relevant to trial — Whether solicitor/client privilege applied to message to lawyer via intermediary — Whether discussions with relatives protected by litigation privilege — Whether expectation of privilege required for litigation privilege to apply — Whether grant of bail sufficient remedy — Whether stay of proceeding appropriate remedy — Whether rebuttable presumption that stay appropriate — Evidence Act 2006, ss 56 and 65.
Law practitioners — Legal professional privilege — Recordings of calls by prisoner to lawyer and to relatives — Discussion with relatives of matters relevant to trial — Whether solicitor/client privilege applied to message to lawyer via intermediary — Whether discussions with relatives protected by litigation privilege — Whether expectation of privilege required for litigation privilege to apply — Whether grant of bail sufficient remedy — Whether stay of proceeding appropriate remedy — Evidence Act 2006, ss 56 and 65.
Statutes — Interpretation — Reference to repealed provision — Extent to which to be read as reference to Act repealing provision referred to — Interpretation Act 1999, s 22(2).
Loading... Please wait...
