COVID-19: Related judgments
The judgments below involve issues related to COVID-19. Many are related to alert level restrictions. This list will be updated as further judgments involving these issues are published.
Supreme Court
| Citation / Summary / Link |
|
Case name: David Simon Barton v R PDF (351 KB) |
Court of Appeal
| Citation / Summary / Link | ||
| Case name: Borrowdale v Director-General of Health Citation: [2020] NZCA 156 8 May 2020 Summary: Application for removal of judicial review proceeding challenging lockdown notices from High Court, and transfer to Court of Appeal, declined. PDF (182 KB) |
||
| Case name: Nottingham v Ardern Citation: [2020] NZCA 144 4 May 2020 Summary: Court of Appeal dismisses appeal against High Court decision to refuse to issue writs of habeas corpus. The measures taken by the Government in response to COVID-19 have not detained the appellants. Judicial review is the appropriate procedure for the allegations of unlawfulness made. Interim name suppression declined. PDF (236 KB) |
High Court
| Citation / Summary / Link | ||
|
Case name: Borrowdale v Director-General of Health |
||
| Case name: R v Tarrant CRI-2019-009-2468 Summary: Sentencing of Brenton Harrison Tarrant to proceed under COVID-19 Alert level 2 – victims to have priority in courtrooms Mander J Minute 18 August 2020 PDF (166 KB) |
||
| Case name: Borrowdale v Director General of Health hearing 27 July 2020 Summary: Borrowdale v Director General of Health – Judicial Review Hearing case synopsis: PDF (257 KB) |
||
| Case name: Graeme Robert Hattie v AG sued on behalf of Chris Hipkins in capacity as Minister of Health and Ors Summary: Muir J vacates judicial review hearing and urges Director General of Health to urgently readdress terms of purported blanket suspension of compassionate leave from quarantine Muir J Minute 8 July 2020 PDF (90 KB) |
||
| Case name: R v Tarrant CRI-2019-009-2468 Summary: High Court announces sentencing in Queen v Tarrant to commence Monday 24 August at Christchurch High Court: reasons Mander J Minute 2 July 2020 PDF (153 KB) |
||
|
Case name: Christiansen v The Director-General of Health (reasons) |
||
| Case name: Cama Products Ltd v Power Parts (2018) Ltd Citation: [2020] NZHC 802 24 April 2020 Summary: Of relevance to the legal arrangements in place in response to COVID-19 is para [20]. Judgment available on Judicial Decisions Online |
||
| Case name: B v Ardern Citation: [2020] NZHC 814 24 April 2020 Summary: Application for a writ of habeas corpus. Application declined. PDF (212 KB) |
||
| Case name: A v Ardern Citation: [2020] NZHC 796 23 April 2020 Summary: Application for a writ of habeas corpus. Application declined. PDF (216 KB) |
||
| Case name: Hikaka v New Zealand Police Citation: [2020] NZHC 716 7 April 2020 Summary: Driving offending, theft and breaching community detention and intensive supervision. Unsuccessful appeal from 19 months imprisonment. Home detention unsuitable. COVID-19 referred to as potentially relevant consideration. Judgment: available on Judicial Decisions Online |
||
| Case name: Environmental Protection Authority v BW Offshore Singapore Pte Ltd Citation: [2020] NZHC 704 7 April 2020 Summary: Successful urgent application by EPA to stay Environment Court decision staying abatement notice. Notice prevented oil mining vessel from disconnecting from pipes and leaving New Zealand . Stay granted by the EC allowed disconnection to proceed. HC identified potential legal errors by EC: it did not consider when a notice could be issued for change in circumstances notwithstanding earlier decision; undue focus on legal ownership; risks of vessel being required to stay potentially overstated; and it could not safely conclude that disconnection would be risk neutral. Significant change in circumstances meant that a notice could be issued to allow fuller assessment of potential adverse effects. Judgment: available on Judicial Decisions Online |
||
| Case name: Savill v AMFL Ltd Citation: [2020] NZHC 655 25 March 2020 Summary: Application for without notice interim injunction to restrain mortgagee sale during period of COVID-19 Alert Level 4 restrictions. Application granted. Judgment: available on Judicial Decisions Online |
||
| Case name: Prescott v New Zealand Government Citation: [2020] NZHC 653 25 March 2020 Summary: Court declined to grant the writ of habeas corpus Judgment: available on Judicial Decisions Online |
||
| Case name: R v Ekeroma and Fatu Citation: [2020] NZHC 565 19 March 2020 Summary: Dismissal of further application to discharge jury in relation to COVID-19 developments: here, the Chief Justice's advice to practitioners. Judgment: available on Judicial Decisions Online |
||
| Case name: R v Ekeroma and Fatu Citation: [2020] NZHC 562 19 March 2020 Summary: Reasons for dismissal of application by defendant for discharge of the whole jury, per Juries Act 1981, s 22. The application arose amidst COVID-19 issues and focussed on ss 22(2)(a) and 22(3)(a). Counsel was concerned jurors would "rush to justice", in the face of such issues. One juror discharged due to potential illness per s 22(2)(a). Remaining jurors willing to continue. At time of judgment, a "casualty" or "emergency" was not constituted, trial fairness not jeopardised. Application dismissed. Judgment: available on Judicial Decisions Online |
District Court
| Citation / Summary/ Link | |
|
Several cases are published on the District Court website, Cases tag: COVID-19 DC website |