For a Court ready (fee required) version please follow this link
ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF JUDGMENT AND ANY PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS 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.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
CA394/2012 [2012] NZCA 544
BETWEEN SOLOSOLO TOGIA Appellant
ANDNEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent
Hearing: 15 October 2012
Court: Arnold, Andrews and Dobson JJ Counsel: T Ellis and G K Edgeler for Appellant
S B Edwards for Respondent
Judgment: 23 November 2012 at 10.30 am
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
A The two questions of law posed by the High Court and set out at [9]
below are both answered “Yes”.
B Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.
CPublication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings in the news media or on the internet or any other publicly available database is prohibited until final disposition of the trial. Publication in a law report
or law digest is permitted, however.
TOGIA V NEW ZEALAND POLICE COA CA394/2012 [23 November 2012]
REASONS OF THE COURT
(Given by Dobson J)
Scope of the appeal
[1] This pre-trial appeal results from leave granted to the appellant (Mr Togia) by the High Court, to pursue two questions of law.1 Leave has been granted to pursue what amounts to a second appeal under s 144(1) of the Summary Proceedings Act
1957. The issues arise in the context of challenges to the lawfulness and adequacy of steps taken (originally in the District Court) to determine whether Mr Togia is fit to stand trial.
[2] At the time of the appeal before the High Court in September 2011, Mr Togia was facing six charges: two of assault under s 9 of the Summary Offences Act 1981 and one each of assault under s 196 of the Crimes Act 1961, assault with a weapon, male assaults female and driving with excess blood alcohol. The incidents alleged to give rise to these charges occurred between May 2008 and December 2009.
[3] The question of Mr Togia’s fitness to stand trial arose. Under s 4 of the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 (CPMIP), a person is unfit to stand trial if he or she is unable, due to mental impairment, to conduct a defence, either personally or through counsel; to plead; to adequately understand the nature, purpose or possible consequences of the proceedings; or to communicate adequately with counsel for the purpose of conducting a defence. Under s 9, a court may not declare a person unfit to stand trial unless the court is satisfied, to the civil standard, that the evidence is sufficient to establish that the person committed the actus reus of the offence. Hearings in the District Court on 1 September 2009 and
15 March 2010 resulted in findings under s 9 that Mr Togia had caused the acts or omissions that form the basis of all of the relevant charges except the…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Togia v Police and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2012] NZCA 544
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
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.