Insights from our team
When is an undertaking for damages and costs required in proceeds of crime litigation?
The Court of Appeal has its say in Commissioner of Police v Salter on the issue of whether an undertaking for damages was required by the Commissioner of New Zealand Police in proceeds of crime litigation.
Regulating the vaping industry
In 2023, the Government made changes to the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Regulations 2021, reducing the maximum nicotine strength for nicotine salt vaping substances from 50 mg/mL to 28.5 mg/mL. Three companies involved in the manufacturing, importation and sale of vaping products in New Zealand brought judicial review proceedings challenging the Government’s decision
COVID misinformation leads to more professional misconduct for health practitioners
This decision demonstrates that, despite the general right to freedom of expression, practitioners can face professional consequences for making public statements related to health policy in their capacity as health professionals.
Emergent Challenges to Private Sector Enterprise and Public Policy: Smith v Fonterra
The Supreme Court has allowed claims of ‘climate system damage’ to proceed to trial, in a decision highlighting the ongoing role of common law in regulatory frameworks. Whatever the outcome of this particular claim, the Court’s reasoning suggests proceedings of this type may now become a tool to challenge alleged systemic harms resulting from not only private sector enterprise but public policy.
NEW ZEALAND JUDICIARY PUBLISHES GUIDELINES ON THE USE OF AI IN COURTS AND TRIBUNALS
The New Zealand judiciary has published guidelines on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in Courts and Tribunals. There are three guidelines in total, which are each geared towards a different audience..
When will a landowner be liable for health and safety failings?
Learnings from WorkSafe New Zealand v Whakaari Management Limited
A reminder to lawyers of their professional duties
In early 2014, Mrs Pfisterer, whose home had been significantly damaged in the Canterbury earthquakes, entered into a contract with Claims Resolution Service Limited (CRS), which offered a “no win, no pay” insurance claims resolution service. This was after negotiations with her insurer, Southern Response Earthquake Services Ltd (Southern Response) had stalled.
Can health practitioners be disciplined for sharing misinformation?
In PCC v Tepou, the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal (the Tribunal) found that a nurse engaged in professional misconduct through making inappropriate social comments about her fellow health practitioners, and through spreading COVID-19 misinformation on social media and in a radio interview. The Tribunal suspended Nurse Tepou from practice for 12 months, censured her, imposed conditions on her return to practice, and ordered her to pay costs.