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 Team Behind Trump's Throne

Forget the Putin factor. Daily, the team of charlatans, bigots and stunningly ignorant crackpots that Trump is appointing to head key federal agencies is just as alarming. These are positions with vast power and budgetary discretion over policies that stand to affect tens of millions of vulnerable Americans. Sad! More>>

 

Gordon Campbell: On Bill English, Abroad

If David Cameron was the closest thing John Key had to a political mentor, their successors also share a whole lot in common. Theresa May and Bill English were both propelled into the top jobs as the result of unexpected resignations, and without much in the way of credible competition from their colleagues... More>>

ALSO:

Pike River: Labour Bill To Override Safety Act For Mine Entry

“Bill English has been hiding behind the legal excuse that any attempt to re-enter the mine to recover the bodies might place the mine’s owner, Solid Energy Limited, and its directors in breach of the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015." More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On Populism And Labour 2017

For many people on the centre-left, populism is a dirty word, and a shorthand for the politics of bigotry. In this country, it has tended to be equated with the angry legions of New Zealand First. Who knew they were not just a reactionary spasm, but the wave of the future? More>>

Oxfam: 30% Of NZ Owns Less Wealth Than Our Two Richest Men

The research also reveals that the richest one per cent have 20 per cent of the wealth in New Zealand, while 90 per cent of the population owns less than half of the nation’s wealth. The research forms part of a global report released to coincide with this week’s annual meeting of political and business leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. More>>

ALSO:

Hospitals: Resident Doctors Set To Strike Again

Despite discussions between the DHBs and NZRDA over safer hours for resident doctors progressing during the last week, the strike planned for next week appears set to proceed. More>>

ALSO:

Not So Super Fund: More Burning Ethical Questions For Steven Joyce

Greens: Radio New Zealand reported this morning that the New Zealand Superfund has $77 million invested in 47 coal companies that the Norwegian Government’s Pension Fund – the largest sovereign fund in the world – has blacklisted. More>>

Activism: Greenpeace Intercepts World’s Biggest Seismic Oil Ship

Greenpeace crew have made contact with the world’s biggest seismic oil ship after travelling 50 nautical miles on two rigid-hulled inflatables off the coast of Wairarapa... Greenpeace radioed the master of the Amazon Warrior to deliver an open letter of protest signed by over 60,000 New Zealanders. More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: Why Tax Cuts In 2017 Would Be A (Proven) Bad Idea

Ever since the world fell prey to the mullahs of the free market in the 1980s, no amount of real world evidence has managed dispel one key tenet of their economic faith. Namely, the idea that if you cut income taxes and taxes on small business, a wave of individual enterprise and entrepreneurial energy will thus be unleashed, profits will rise and – hey bingo! – the tax cuts will soon be paying for themselves ... More>>

Get More From Scoop

 

LATEST HEADLINES

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Politics
Search Scoop  
 
 
Powered by Vodafone
NZ independent news