Bai-Reddy v Attorney-General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2021-404-001858

[2024] NZHC 2433

UNDER

the Judicial Review Procedure Act 2016 and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

BETWEEN

VENKATADRI BAI-REDDY

Applicant

AND

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS
First Respondent

PRISON DIRECTOR, AUCKLAND SOUTH CORRECTIONS FACILITY

Second Respondent

VISITING JUSTICE AT AUCKLAND SOUTH CORRECTIONS FACILITY

Third Respondent

Hearing:

27 and 28 February 2024

Appearances:

G W Minchin for Applicant

L Dittrich and S L K Shaw for First Respondent
E A Boshier and M Holmes for Second Respondent Third Respondent abides the decision of the Court

Judgment:

30 August 2024

JUDGMENT OF ANDERSON J

This judgment was delivered by me on 30 August 2024 at 3.00 pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules 2016.

………………………………

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:    Meredith Connell, Auckland

Duncan Cotterill, Auckland Crown Law

Exeo Legal

BAI-REDDY v THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2024] NZHC 2433 [30 August 2024]

Table of contents

Para No

Statutory scheme[5]

Purposes and guiding principles[5]

Relationship of purposes and principles to management of the prison[7]

Segregation[11]

Security classifications  [16]

Prisoner accommodation[19]

Factual background[26]

Misconduct charge following 1 May 2021 incident[29]

First period of directed segregation[32]

Second period of directed segregation[41]

Further misconduct proceedings[46]

Overview of Mr Bai-Reddy’s position  [47]

Standard of review of prison decisions in judicial review[49]

First ground of review – Prison Director – illegality/procedural unfairness[53]

Ground of review[53]

Decision[56]

Second ground of review – Prison Director – procedural unfairness               [59]

Ground of review[59]

Decision[61]

Third ground of review – Prison Director – illegality  [65]

Ground of review[65]

Decision[67]

Fourth ground of review – Prison Director – “punishment regime”                [74]

Ground of review[74]

Decision[77]

Fifth ground of review – Prison Director – directed segregation order           [89]

Ground of review[89]

Decision[92]

Sixth ground of review – Attorney-General – directed segregation                [105]

Ground of review[105]

Attorney-General’s involvement and submissions[109]

Decision[127]

Seventh ground of review – Visiting Justice – Visiting Justice hearing

16 June 2021[141]

Ground of review[141]

Statutory framework[143]

Visiting Justice hearing[150]

Decision[153]

Eighth ground of review – Prison Director – illegality  [159]

Ground of review[159]

Decision[160]

Security classification aspects of sixth ground of review against the

Attorney-General	[169]
Ground of review	[169]
Decision	[173]

Ninth ground of review – Prison Director – procedural irregularity[175]

Ground of review[175]

Decision – Requests for witnesses and evidence[185]

Decision – “Prejudicial” delay in the appeal being heard before the

Visiting Justice[189]

Tenth ground of review – Visiting Justice – Visiting Justice hearing on

7 April 2022[194]

Ground of review[194]

Decision[196]

Eleventh ground of review – Attorney-General  [200]

Ground of review[200]

Decision[203]

Twelfth ground of review – Prison Director – procedural irregularity          [205]

Ground of review[205]

Decision[206]

Thirteenth ground of review – Attorney-General – illegality  [210]

New Zealand Bill of Rights Act claims[212] Section 25(f) – Attorney-General and the Visiting Justice[221] Sections 9 and 23(5) – Attorney-General and Prison Director[223] Section 25 – Attorney-General and Prison…