| ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 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 SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND |
| SC 17/2014 [2014] NZSC 44 |
| BETWEEN | M |
| AND | THE QUEEN |
| Court: | McGrath, William Young and Glazebrook JJ |
Counsel: | |
| Judgment: | 1 May 2014 |
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
Details suppressed until final disposition of trial.
____________________________________________________________________
Details
- AGLC
- M v The Queen [2014] NZSC 44
- Case
- [2014] NZSC 44
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of M v The Queen before the Supreme Court of New Zealand concerns a legal dispute where the applicant, M, seeks to prohibit the publication of the reasons for judgment in news media or on the internet, while permitting publication in law reports or digests. The respondent is the Queen, represented in this case by the state. The case was heard by McGrath, William Young, and Glazebrook JJ, and the judgment was delivered on 1 May 2014. The court was tasked with deciding whether it should grant an order prohibiting the publication of the judgment's reasons in the public domain, except for legal reports, pending the final disposition of the trial.
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's right to a fair trial could be prejudiced by the publication of the reasons for judgment in the media. The court needed to balance the right to a fair trial against the principle of open justice and the public's right to access information about court proceedings. The applicant argued that the dissemination of the reasons for judgment in the media could taint the jury pool and compromise the fairness of the trial, while the state contended that the principle of open justice should be upheld, allowing the public to access information about court proceedings, subject to certain exceptions.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court of New Zealand considered the principles of open justice and the potential for prejudice to the fairness of a trial. The court recognised the importance of open justice in maintaining public confidence in the legal system but also acknowledged the need to protect the right to a fair trial. The court concluded that in certain circumstances, where there is a real risk of prejudice to the fairness of a trial, an order prohibiting publication of the reasons for judgment in the media may be appropriate. The court determined that in this case, the reasons for judgment could be published in law reports or digests, but not in news media or on the internet, until the final disposition of the trial. The court's decision was based on a careful consideration of the potential for prejudice and the need to balance the competing interests involved.
The final orders of the court were that the reasons for judgment in the case of M v The Queen could be published in law reports or digests, but not in news media or on the internet, until the final disposition of the trial. This decision aimed to protect the applicant's right to a fair trial while still upholding the principle of open justice to a reasonable extent. The court's order was designed to strike a balance between the competing interests of ensuring a fair trial and maintaining public access to information about court proceedings.
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's right to a fair trial could be prejudiced by the publication of the reasons for judgment in the media. The court needed to balance the right to a fair trial against the principle of open justice and the public's right to access information about court proceedings. The applicant argued that the dissemination of the reasons for judgment in the media could taint the jury pool and compromise the fairness of the trial, while the state contended that the principle of open justice should be upheld, allowing the public to access information about court proceedings, subject to certain exceptions.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court of New Zealand considered the principles of open justice and the potential for prejudice to the fairness of a trial. The court recognised the importance of open justice in maintaining public confidence in the legal system but also acknowledged the need to protect the right to a fair trial. The court concluded that in certain circumstances, where there is a real risk of prejudice to the fairness of a trial, an order prohibiting publication of the reasons for judgment in the media may be appropriate. The court determined that in this case, the reasons for judgment could be published in law reports or digests, but not in news media or on the internet, until the final disposition of the trial. The court's decision was based on a careful consideration of the potential for prejudice and the need to balance the competing interests involved.
The final orders of the court were that the reasons for judgment in the case of M v The Queen could be published in law reports or digests, but not in news media or on the internet, until the final disposition of the trial. This decision aimed to protect the applicant's right to a fair trial while still upholding the principle of open justice to a reasonable extent. The court's order was designed to strike a balance between the competing interests of ensuring a fair trial and maintaining public access to information about court proceedings.
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.