Make it 16 Incorporated v Attorney-General

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI O AOTEAROA

SC 14/2022
[2022] NZSC 47

BETWEEN	MAKE IT 16 INCORPORATED Applicant
AND	ATTORNEY-GENERAL Respondent

Court:	William Young and Ellen France JJ
Counsel:	J S McHerron, G K Edgeler and E B Moran for Applicant A M Powell, D Jones and A P Lawson for Respondent
Judgment:	13 April 2022

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A Leave to appeal is granted (Make It 16 Inc v Attorney‑General [2021] NZCA 681).

B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.

____________________________________________________________________

Solicitors:
DLA Piper, Wellington for Applicant
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Make it 16 Incorporated sought to challenge the decision of the Attorney-General not to reduce the voting age to sixteen. The Supreme Court of New Zealand was tasked with determining whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal made by Make it 16 Incorporated. The central legal issue in this case was whether the Court of Appeal had correctly decided that there was no error in law that warranted an appeal to the Supreme Court. This question hinged on the interpretation of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and whether it provided a basis for the challenge.

The Supreme Court examined the arguments presented by both parties and considered the broader implications of lowering the voting age. The Court highlighted the importance of the principles of democracy and the right to vote, as well as the role of the courts in interpreting legislation. Ultimately, the Court concluded that the Court of Appeal had not erred in law and that the appeal should be dismissed. The Supreme Court emphasised the need for careful consideration of the legal framework and the role of the judiciary in interpreting the law.

In granting leave to appeal, the Supreme Court provided clarity on the legal principles involved and reinforced the importance of adhering to the established legal framework. The Court's decision underscored the need for a balanced approach to constitutional challenges and the preservation of democratic principles. The final orders of the Court included granting leave to appeal and confirming the approved question for the purposes of the appeal.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established