R v Byford

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PALMERSTON NORTH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE PAPAIOEA ROHE

CRI-2006-054-557

[2024] NZHC 3194

THE KING

v

TERRY KAWHIAITI BYFORD ANGELA JONNA NGATAKI

On the papers:

Counsel:

B D Vanderkolk for Crown P Kayne for Byford

P Coles for Ngataki

Judgment:

31 October 2024

JUDGMENT OF GRAU J

[Access to Court documents]

[1] Ms Angela Anderson (previously known as Angela Ngataki) has applied for access to court documents in this proceeding, in respect of which Ms Anderson was a defendant. Ms Anderson seeks the documents to challenge her criminal convictions that resulted. On 13 September 2024, Isac J issued an interim decision granting access to court documents subject to the following conditions:1

(a)the case files were to be reviewed by a Registrar to identify any documents that may be subject to a claim to privacy by Ms Anderson’s co-defendant in the proceedings, Mr Byford; and

1 R v Byford [2024] NZHC 2633 at [11].

R v BYFORD [2024] NZHC 3194 [31 October 2024]

(b)any papers which did not fall within the scope of the request, relate to the jury or jury members, or which are the private notes of a Judge or the internal communications of case officers within the Court registry, are not to be disclosed.

[2] Justice Isac directed that, once the files were reviewed by a Registrar and the appropriate papers copied, they were to be returned to either him or to another Judge for approval before release to Ms Anderson.

[3] The Registrar has duly reviewed the case files and documents contained therein, and the matter was referred to me as duty Judge to approve release.

[4] I have reviewed the copied documents, and I am satisfied that they do not contain any documents that may be subject to a privacy claim by Mr Byford. I am also satisfied that the copied documents fall within the scope of Ms Anderson’s request and do not relate to the Judge or jury members, nor are there any private notes or internal communications with the Registry. I have also reviewed the documents the Registrar has removed on the basis that they do not accord with either of the conditions set out by Isac J. I am similarly satisfied that all of the documents that have been removed (and not copied for release) have been done so appropriately.

[5] I therefore make an order that the copied documents may now be released to Ms Anderson. Given some of the copied material contains personal information about witnesses and Police officers involved in Ms Anderson’s trial, I direct that Ms Anderson may not use or forward the documents for any reason other than their use by her challenge to criminal convictions.

Grau J

Solicitors:
Crown Law, Palmerston North

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Palmerston North Registry, Ms Angela Anderson, formerly known as Angela Ngataki, sought access to court documents from a proceeding in which she had been a defendant. The application was made to challenge her criminal convictions. The court had already granted an interim decision allowing access to the documents, subject to certain conditions to protect the privacy of co-defendant Terry Kawhiaiti Byford. These conditions required a Registrar to review the case files to identify any documents that might be subject to a privacy claim by Mr Byford and to ensure that no documents relating to the jury, private notes of a judge, or internal communications within the Court registry were disclosed.

The court was required to decide whether the documents identified by the Registrar for release met the conditions set out in the interim decision and whether the documents that were withheld were appropriately removed. The key issues were whether the documents contained any material that might infringe upon Mr Byford's privacy rights and whether they fell within the scope of Ms Anderson's request. The court also had to ensure that the documents were not used for any purpose other than the challenge to her criminal convictions.

After reviewing the documents, Justice Grau found that none of the documents that were to be released contained any material that might infringe upon Mr Byford's privacy rights. The documents were within the scope of Ms Anderson's request and did not relate to the judge, jury members, or internal communications. The documents that were withheld had been removed appropriately. Therefore, the court made an order that the copied documents could be released to Ms Anderson, with the condition that she could not use or forward the documents for any purpose other than challenging her criminal convictions.

The court directed that Ms Anderson may not use or forward the documents for any reason other than their use in challenging her criminal convictions. This decision ensures that the privacy rights of Mr Byford are protected while allowing Ms Anderson to pursue her legal challenge.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established