Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | News Video | Crime | Employers | Housing | Immigration | Legal | Local Govt. | Maori | Welfare | Unions | Youth | Search

 


Judgment: Criminal Bar Association of NZ v Attorney-General

[Judgment: Criminal_Bar_Association_v_AG.pdf]

COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

MEDIA RELEASE

CRIMINAL BAR ASSOCIATION OF NEW ZEALAND v ATTORNEY-GENERAL

(CA606/2012) [2013] NZCA X

PRESS SUMMARY

This summary is provided to assist in the understanding of the Court’s judgment. It does not comprise part of the reasons for that judgment. The full judgment with reasons is the only authoritative document. The full text of the judgment and reasons can be found at www.courtsofnz.govt.nz.

The Court has allowed in part an appeal by the Criminal Bar Association from a judgment of the High Court concerning the lawfulness of the Government’s criminal legal aid policy. Some background is necessary to explain the Court’s judgment.

In response to its concern over the rising cost of legal aid, the Government commissioned a review of the legal aid system. The outcome of that review was the passing of the Legal Services Act 2011. That Act disestablished the Legal Services Agency, and moved the task of granting and administering legal aid from the Agency into the Ministry of Justice. The Act gave the Secretary for Justice overall responsibility for administering legal aid. The Act established the office of Legal Services Commissioner within the Ministry, and gave the Commissioner responsibility for the grant of legal aid under the Act. The Act required the Commissioner to act independently when performing that function.

In March 2012 the Secretary for Justice introduced a new policy called the Criminal Fixed Fee and Complex Cases Policy and Procedures. This Policy fixes the fees lawyers are paid for providing particular legal services, regardless of how much time is involved. Only if amendment criteria set down in the Policy are met will more than the fixed fees be paid. When introducing the Policy the Government anticipated that the fixed fees would apply in 95% of criminal legal aid cases. Previously, lawyers had been paid at an hourly rate, up to a maximum number of hours.

The Criminal Bar Association represents lawyers practising criminal law. The Association applied to the High Court for judicial review of the Policy, alleging that it was unlawful in several respects. Justice Simon France dismissed the Association’s application, finding that there was nothing legally wrong with the Policy. The Association appealed that judgment.

The Court of Appeal’s judgment holds that the Policy is unlawful in two respects. The first is that the Policy was made by the Secretary. By the Policy the Secretary effectively dictates to the Commissioner in respect of the grant of legal aid for most criminal cases. That is unlawful because the Legal Services Act makes it clear that the grant of legal aid in individual cases is the function of the Commissioner, and one which the Commissioner is to exercise independently.

In this part of its judgment the Court emphasises the importance Parliament placed on the independent exercise of the Commissioner’s functions. The prosecution of crime is carried out by the Solicitor-General as an independent law officer of the Crown, to avoid any appearance of political decision making in relation to public prosecutions. Parliament considered it important that the granting of legal aid to those accused of crime be controlled by an independent person, as the Act provides. It is inappropriate that the Secretary dictate to the Commissioner how he should perform that independent function.

The Court also found the Policy is unlawful in that it unreasonably fetters or restricts the Commissioner’s discretion when exercising his independent functions under the Act. The Court’s view is that the criteria in the Policy are so unclear, inflexible and unachievable that they leave no room for the Commissioner to exercise discretion to depart from the fixed fees where the Commissioner considers they are inappropriate for the particular case.

The Court rejected the Association’s arguments that the Policy was unlawful in further respects. It held that cutting the cost of legal services was a lawful purpose of the Legal Services Act. It also held that the Secretary for Justice was entitled to delegate his functions under the Legal Services Act to a particular person who had also been appointed Commissioner.

Having found the Policy unlawful in two respects, the Court considered that, strictly, it did not need to decide three further challenges by the Association to the lawfulness of the Policy. However, the Court dealt with these for completeness, rejecting all three. It held that the Secretary, when developing the Policy, had properly taken into account defendants’ rights protected by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Further, that the Policy was not an unreasonable one, in administrative law terms. Finally, it held that the Secretary correctly regarded himself as bound by a decision of Cabinet in terms of the development and implementation of the Policy.

ENDS

[Judgment: Criminal_Bar_Association_v_AG.pdf]

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

Gordon Campbell: On The Russel Norman Resignation

While not the decisive factor, last year’s election result must have made it easier for Greens Co-Leader Russel Norman to finally call it a day. After three years of solid campaigning on social justice, economic and environmental issues – and amidst another round of self-destruction by Labour, its ally and rival on the centre-left – the Greens had realistically expected to end up close to 15 % on election day. Instead, it barely held its own, and failed to increase its vote.

This would have been an especially bitter result for Norman. For the past six years, Norman has been the de facto leader of the Opposition – especially after Labour lost the plot with a series of inept leaders and a chronic identity crisis about what, if anything, it now stood for. More>>

 

Education: As Predicted, Charter Schools In Trouble

QPEC: When the government changed the Education Act to allow for charter schools, it bet that a bunch of non-educators using their own untested theories of education could run schools for our most disadvantaged students and achieve better results than state schools. More>>

ALSO:

Quick By-Election Expected: Mike Sabin Announces Resignation As Northland MP

Northland MP, Mike Sabin, today announced he has resigned from Parliament, effective immediately. Mr Sabin said he had decided to resign due to personal issues that were best dealt with outside Parliament. Mr Sabin will not be making any further comment. More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On The Eleanor Catton Rumpus

If anyone was in doubt about the accuracy of the comments made in India by Eleanor Catton, the reaction from some quarters here at home has gone a long way to proving her point… More>>

ALSO:

More Rent Assistance, Less State-Owned Housing: John Key Speech - Next Steps In Social Housing

"We are going to ensure that more people get into social housing over the next three years, whether that is run by Housing New Zealand or a community provider. The social housing budget provides for around 62,000 income-related rent subsidies a year. We are committed to increasing that to around 65,000 subsidies by 2017/18, which will cost an extra $40 million a year." More>>

ALSO:

The Future Of Work: Andrew Little - State Of The Nation 2015

In 2005 when I led the EPMU we worked together with Air New Zealand to find a way to keep engineering jobs that were heading overseas. A lot of these workers were people I’d known for years and they were facing not just losing their jobs but not being able to find the kind of work they do without going overseas. A lot of people were facing personal and financial upheaval.... More>>

ALSO:

Get More From Scoop

 

LATEST HEADLINES

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Politics
Search Scoop  
 
 
Powered by Vodafone
NZ independent news