The Queen v K

Case [2014] NZSC 166

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE JUDGMENT AND ANY PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS (INCLUDING THE RESULT) IN NEWS MEDIA OR ON THE INTERNET OR OTHER PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATABASE UNTIL FINAL DISPOSITION OF TRIAL. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED.

NB:  LOWER COURT RESTRICTIONS ON PUBLICATION OF POLICE SUMMARY OF FACTS AND OTHER MATERIAL REMAIN IN FORCE.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
SC 115/2014
[2014] NZSC 166
BETWEEN

THE QUEEN
Applicant

AND

K
Respondent
Court:

Glazebrook, Arnold and O'Regan JJ

Counsel:
Judgment:

19 November 2014

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

Details suppressed until final disposition of trial.

REASONS

  1. This appeal will be heard immediately following the hearing of the appeal in R v TWW.[1]  The Court has set aside Thursday 12 February 2015 and Friday 13 February 2015 for the hearing of these two appeals.

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Applicant


Details
AGLC
The Queen v K [2014] NZSC 166
Case
[2014] NZSC 166
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of New Zealand, the Queen, represented by the Crown Law Office, has brought an appeal against the respondent, K. The central issue in this case is the suppression of information regarding the proceedings and the outcome of the trial. The appeal is set to be heard on 12 and 13 February 2015, immediately following the hearing of another appeal, R v TWW. The Court has imposed restrictions on the publication of the judgment, any part of the proceedings, and the result of the case in news media, on the internet, or in any publicly available database until the final disposition of the trial. However, publication in a law report or digest is permitted. Additionally, the lower court's restrictions on the publication of a police summary of facts and other material remain in force.

The legal issues before the Court pertain to the extent and nature of the suppression order and its implications on the freedom of the press and the public's right to know. The Court must consider the balance between the need to protect the integrity of the judicial process and the principles of open justice. The central question is whether the current restrictions are justified and proportionate to the interests at stake. The Court is tasked with interpreting the relevant statutory provisions and case law to determine the appropriate scope and duration of the suppression order.

The Court, comprising Glazebrook, Arnold, and O'Regan JJ, will consider the arguments presented by the counsel on both sides. The outcome of the appeal will likely set a precedent for similar cases, influencing how the courts handle sensitive information in criminal proceedings. The Court's decision will be critical in defining the boundaries of suppression orders and their impact on the broader principles of transparency and accountability in the justice system.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.