Simpson v Attorney-General [Baigent's Case] - [1994] 3 NZLR 667

Constitutional law — New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 — Remedies — Whether civil action for damages is available against the Crown for breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 — Relationship between action for damages under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and actions based on claims in tort — Observations as to appropriateness of Judges rather than juries determining the remedy to be afforded when rights in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 have been breached — Observations as to appropriate quantum when damages are awarded for breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Constitutional law — Crown immunities and privileges — Civil liability — Whether Crown may be vicariously liable for torts committed by persons executing or purporting to execute search warrants — Whether statutory immunities extend to cover actions of persons who execute warrants maliciously or with knowledge that a search is not one authorised by the warrant — Whether statutory immunities extend to persons who execute warrants in such a way that search is unreasonable in terms of s 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 — Crimes Act 1961, ss 26 and 27 - Police Act 1958, s 39 - Crown Proceedings Act 1950, s 6(5).

Tort — Cause of action — Crown immunity — Whether Crown immune from claim for damages for trespass, false imprisonment and breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 - Vicarious liability — Whether Commissioner of Police or Deputy Commissioners employer of police officers and vicariously liable for torts committed by them — New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, ss 21, 22 and 23(5) — Police Act 1958, s 39 — Crown Proceedings Act 1950, s 6(5).

Tort — Negligence — Whether action lies for negligent procurement of search warrant in absence of malice.