When is it appropriate to withhold a trust deed from a beneficiary? Disclosure of trust documents in the New Zealand Supreme Court

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (8) ◽  
pp. 824-829
Author(s):  
Stephanie Thompson
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Detailed Consideration ◽  
Basic Trust

Abstract Disputes over beneficiaries’ access to trust documents are increasingly common, particularly as a prelude to hostile litigation. This article examines one of the latest offerings on this subject, Erceg v Erceg [2017] NZSC 28, in which the New Zealand Supreme Court refused to permit a discretionary beneficiary access to trust deeds. The extreme facts of Erceg demonstrate the importance of courts and trustees retaining a discretion to refuse disclosure of even basic trust documents. The decision also clarifies several points of principle about the court’s supervisory jurisdiction, and gives detailed consideration to the factors the court should take into account.

The exclusion of prison informant evidence for unreliability in new Zealand

2021 ◽  
pp. 136571272110112
Author(s):  
Anna High
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Social Science Evidence ◽  
Science Evidence

Prison informant or ‘jailhouse snitch’ evidence is a notoriously unreliable category of evidence. In light of reliability concerns, the New Zealand Supreme Court has adopted a progressive approach to the exclusion of prison informant evidence, centred on greater use of general exclusionary provisions as a threshold of reliability for the admission of suspect evidence. In so doing, the court has shifted the emphasis from deference to the jury as arbiter of ultimate reliability and towards more robust judicial gatekeeping as a safeguard against false testimony. This article critically analyses the New Zealand approach, including by way of comparison with Canada, Australia and England and Wales. The New Zealand approach is presented as a principled and important example of adapting fundamental evidentiary principles and provisions in line with emerging social science evidence. However, in light of the general concerns surrounding this class of evidence, ultimately further safeguards are still needed

scholarly journals The Contractual Interpretation of Tipping J

2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 227
Author(s):  
Matthew Barber
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
The Other ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Comprehensive Examination ◽  
The Future ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
The Way

In the Supreme Court decision of Vector Gas Ltd v Bay of Plenty Energy Ltd, Tipping J put forward an approach to contact interpretation that, while indebted to that of Lord Hoffmann, was expressed differently and promoted the use of evidence of prior negotiations. Despite not gaining the support of any of the other sitting judges, this approach was swiftly taken up in the lower courts and, until recently at least, seems to have been accepted as representing New Zealand law. This article attempts a comprehensive examination of Tipping J’s approach. It concludes that, while coherent in principle, the detail of the approach is flawed in a number of ways, especially the way in which evidence of subsequent conduct is assumed to work. The future of Tipping J’s approach is considered.

Constraints on the Use of Adaptive Management in New Zealand’s Resource Management

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Nicholas Kirk
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Resource Management ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Adaptive Management ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Resource Management System ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Flexible Resource

This paper examines the development of adaptive management in New Zealand’s resource management case law. In particular, this paper investigates a Supreme Court decision (Sustain Our Sounds Inc v King Salmon New Zealand Co Ltd), which established a set of criteria for implementing adaptive management through New Zealand’s Resource Management Act. This paper describes King Salmon’s initial request for aquaculture permits, the Supreme Court appeal, and the Supreme Court’s justification for an adaptive management approach. Analyzing this justification, this paper explores the remaining constraints using an adaptive management approach to enable a more agile and flexible resource management system in New Zealand.

Appealing to history: the New Zealand Supreme Court debate

Legal Studies ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 24 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 210-227
Author(s):  
Richard Cornes
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Police Officer ◽  
Privy Council

For a New Zealander one of the odder tourist experiences available in London - and soon to disappear - was to go to the top of Downing Street, and after a brief word with the police officer at the gates, to be ushered in to watch a hearing of the highest court of (though not actually in) New Zealand. Beginning with the arrival of British settlers the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council served as New Zealand's court of final appeal. Sitting in the very heart of London it was possible to hear lawyers with New Zealand accents argue about places and concepts quite literally a world away.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document