IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

BETWEEN ATTORNEY-GENERAL
Appellant
AND ARTHUR WILLIAM TAYLOR First Respondent
HINEMANU NGARONOA, SANDRA WILDE, KIRSTY OLIVIA FENSOM AND CLAIRE THRUPP Second to Fifth Respondents
Hearing: 6 and 7 March 2018 Court: Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, O’Regan and Ellen France JJ

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The cross-appeal is allowed. Mr Taylor accordingly has standing.
C Costs are reserved.

Introduction
[1] The primary issue raised by this appeal is whether the High Court has the power to make a declaration that legislation is inconsistent with the provisions of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (the Bill of Rights). The issue arises in the context of an amendment in 2010 to the Electoral Act 1993. The Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Act 2010 (the 2010 Amendment) extended the prohibition on voting to all prisoners. Prior to the 2010 Amendment, the prohibition was confined to prisoners sentenced to a term of imprisonment of three years or more.

….

Result

[71] For these reasons, in accordance with the view of the majority, the appeal is dismissed. The cross-appeal is allowed. The effect of that decision is that Mr Taylor has standing. However, as the Court of Appeal did not amend the declaration of inconsistency granted, we need not amend the order granted below.

Full decision
http://img.scoop.co.nz/media/pdfs/1811/Supreme Court Decision.pdf

© Scoop Media