James Farmer

LEGAL COMMENTARY

How good is our Supreme Court?

Monday, August 08, 2011

Some time ago I decided to establish a web site, not because I was short of work but because, when googling myself (because others had apparently done it), I was at first gratified that I had apparently made the list of “Best lawyers” in a US publication but perturbed to find on further reading this was in the category of arbitrators and mediators.  Never having been either and not wanting to be charged with misleading conduct, I decided that a web site which at least summarised my legal career and fields of practice was a necessary self-defence mechanism.  Hence this web site.

Having gone that far, I then wondered if there was a way of inducing people to return to the web site from time to time if they ever ventured there in the first place. I did think that now and then I had views and thoughts about legal matters that others might be interested in, if only to express strong disagreement with them.  And so I decided to incorporate into the web site what will hopefully be a regular (every few weeks) comment on contemporary issues.  It is possible to “subscribe” for them by entering a name and email address on the right side of the page, in which case a message will be automatically sent advising of a new commentary as it is posted, at which point it is entirely up to the recipient to decide whether or not to come back to the web site to read that commentary. All of us, I am sure, are fed up with receiving unsolicited emails and I am intending to avoid that.

So for the first column, I have chosen the deliberately provocative title “How good is our Supreme Court?” Having perhaps seduced the reader to read this far, I should however now disclose that I do not intend to undertake a comprehensive review of the Court or to revive debates around whether we should have replaced appeals to the Privy Council.  That is history.

It was for that reason perhaps a little surprising that Justice Peter Blanchard should recently, when delivering a paper on law reform, have felt the need to defend the Court’s record at some length and to have done so by references to the Privy Council.  His basic point, as I understand it, was that the Privy Council had been the prerogative of tax and commercial litigants and that the Supreme Court has enabled the full range of litigants to seek to go to the ultimate level of appeal.  At least the second part of that statement is undoubtedly right but what the results of that may be is perhaps a matter for another column (but perhaps not, also).

For myself, I would at this point say this much.  I have generally thought that most of the Judgments of the Court that I have read are reasonably unexceptional in outcome and any criticisms of reasoning are more the product of separate Judgments that take different lines, and thereby create confusion and uncertainty in the law, rather than of the substance of that reasoning.

I do not propose to venture further than this by way of general observation of the Court’s performance to date.  In particular, I do not feel the need to draw to readers’ attention the fact that the Judges on the Court can be said to have “the necessary qualities of intelligence, logical thought and analytical rigour”, as did one commentator recently when accusing the Court of having departed from the standard required to prevent the impairment of confidence in it.  That criticism was made in relation to the Court’s Judgments in the Bartle case – ironically one which is widely regarded as having restored the confidence of the banking and financial sector following contrary Judgments in the Court of Appeal that gave rise to much concern in that sector. It is enough to say that the very presence of the present Judges on the Court can be assumed to be the result of the qualities that the commentator gratuitously says are required.

My criticisms, if I can express them with respect, are limited to 2 recent cases:

The first relates to the superficial way in which the Court dealt with the important competition law issues that were rightly brought to it in Commerce Commission v. Telecom (the 0867 case).  As (losing) counsel in the case, I do not comment here on the outcome – indeed from the point of view of the Commerce Commission wanting to establish a precedent that clarified the law that may not have been that important - but I think I am entitled to endorse the views of many others practising in this important area of law and policy that we were entitled to much better principled guidance than we received in the short Judgment that was delivered.  Giving guidance and certainty on issues of public importance is, after all, part of the raison d’etre for the Court.  The claim that New Zealand and Australian law on what constitutes taking advantage of market power are now in harmony will simply not withstand analysis.

The second case which in my view warrants serious question is the Morse case as to which it can be said that, if the Supreme Court wishes to gain acceptance as the source of wisdom on all legal matters, it did itself no favours. In that case, the Court overturned Judgments of the District Court, the High Court and the Court of Appeal that a protestor burning the New Zealand flag in front of veterans and their families at an Anzac Day Dawn Parade was not offensive behaviour. 

The National Business Review, which has always held very strong views about the Privy Council-Supreme Court debate, took the opportunity to revive that debate (a pointless reaction, in my view), but was undoubtedly on solid ground in expressing a sense of outrage about the Court’s decision and in reminding us (those who needed reminding) of the sacrifices made by the previous generation (and their families) in fighting for the liberties we enjoy today. 

As one reads the learned discourses of the separate Judgments of the Court in which the history of the legislation and relevant case law is analysed in great detail with great skill, it is hard to suppress a cry for the injection of some homely common sense and a far greater degree of sensitivity for those who were offended.  If the law really be that there must be a danger of some degree of public disorder before the offence is committed, then Ms. Morse must count herself lucky that she was arrested so swiftly and that she therefore was able, through her counsel, to take part in an arid legal debate in the highest court of the land rather than face what must have been the inevitable wrath of the 5000 strong crowd of those attending the ceremony and wishing to pay respect to the dead.

Ms Morse can surely also count herself lucky that the Court was so tolerant of her counsel’s decision at trial not to cross examine witnesses whose evidence, on any reasonable view, would have supported a conviction, even on the Supreme Court’s more stringent test of offensive conduct.  And whether she was entitled to have the benefit of the Court’s discretion not to order a retrial is another question upon which there will be other views.

On that sombre note, I conclude this inaugural commentary.  The web site is not a blog and so there is no facility provided for retort.  The best form of dissent from anything that I have said above will however be not to accept the invitation to be advised of future commentary! As to that, my intention is say something next about happiness, living a balanced life and legal practice.

Recent Posts

  1. America's Cup Venue - Fact or Fiction Chris Goode 04-Apr-2022
  2. Covid and the New Zealand Rules Committee Proposed Reforms Chris Goode 24-Jan-2022
  3. A Chat On The Virtual Couch About My Legal Career Chris Goode 26-Nov-2021
  4. America’s Cup Home Defence – Requisition For Special General Meeting Of Members Of Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron To Discuss Venue For Next Defence Chris Goode 24-Nov-2021
  5. Pandemics 12-Nov-2021
  6. America's Cup - Just Do It and Positivity 20-Sep-2021
  7. September 11 - 20 Years On 09-Sep-2021
  8. Whither America's Cup? Chris Goode 22-Jun-2021
  9. Conducting Civil Appeals Chris Goode 07-Mar-2021
  10. David Barnes (27 April 1958 - 23 October 2020) - A Personal Note Chris Goode 02-Nov-2020
  11. Cannabis Bill Not the Right Reform Chris Goode 07-Oct-2020
  12. Whatever the result, is this the last time the America's Cup event is held in New Zealand? Chris Goode 14-Sep-2020
  13. Cannabis Legal Reform - Arguments For and Against Chris Goode 13-Aug-2020
  14. Will the Proposed Cannabis Legislation Achieve its "Overarching Objective" of Reducing the Harms Associated with Cannabis Use? Chris Goode 18-May-2020
  15. The Debate Continues - Virtual Hearings or Real Hearings Chris Goode 02-May-2020
  16. These Issues were all Predicted Pre-Covid-19 and 6 Years Ago Chris Goode 02-May-2020
  17. And here is a Report from Stuff of a Virtual Hearing this Week Chris Goode 30-Apr-2020
  18. More Correspondence on Covid-19 and the Courts Chris Goode 30-Apr-2020
  19. In Defence of Remote Technology - from Steve Keall Chris Goode 29-Apr-2020
  20. Court Hearings and Covid-19 - Part Two Chris Goode 29-Apr-2020
  21. Court Hearings and Covid-19 Chris Goode 28-Apr-2020
  22. Covid-19 and Executory Contracts: Will the Doctrine of Frustration Apply? Chris Goode 06-Apr-2020
  23. Race, Poverty and Education - Lessons from the UK learned while spending Christmas in London December 2019 Chris Goode 13-Jan-2020
  24. Witnesses in Civil Cases - the Consequences of Not Calling and of Not Cross-Examining - A Paper Presented to the Pacific Islands Lawyers Association, Auckland, 22 November 2019 Chris Goode 21-Nov-2019
  25. The Forthcoming Referendum on the Growing and Supply of Cannabis for Personal Recreational Use Chris Goode 19-Nov-2018
  26. Armistice Day and Its Sequel Chris Goode 13-Nov-2018
  27. An Easy Read of the Rule of Law in the World of Fiction Chris Goode 08-Aug-2018
  28. Bullying, Harassment and Gender Bias Chris Goode 22-May-2018
  29. Criticising Judges Chris Goode 07-May-2018
  30. America's Cup Part 3A Chris Goode 11-Dec-2017
  31. America's Cup Part 3 Chris Goode 04-Dec-2017
  32. Pro Bono Publico as an Aid to Living a Balanced Lifestyle Chris Goode 08-Nov-2017
  33. Terence Arnold Retires From the Supreme Court Bench Chris Goode 10-Apr-2017
  34. From Violence to Redemption Chris Goode 14-Mar-2017
  35. Drugs, Sports and Society Chris Goode 18-Oct-2016
  36. Are Our Law Schools Churning Out Too Many Lawyers? Chris Goode 25-Aug-2016
  37. Equiticorp 20 Years On Chris Goode 07-Jun-2016
  38. The Year in Retrospect Chris Goode 19-Jan-2016
  39. A Good Year for the Farmer Legal Family Chris Goode 30-Oct-2015
  40. Having a Balanced Life Style - Part 4 Chris Goode 21-Sep-2015
  41. A Balanced Life Style (Part 3), Prisoners' Voting Rights, Top Gun, 7000kms in a Corvette, John Maynard Keynes and Atticus Finch Chris Goode 05-Aug-2015
  42. Biographies Chris Goode 13-Apr-2015
  43. The Cost of Justice Chris Goode 13-Mar-2015
  44. The Increase in Unrepresented Litigants and Their Effect on the Judicial Process Chris Goode 11-Feb-2015
  45. Evidence - Notes of Presentation to Continuing Legal Education Seminar November 2014 Chris Goode 01-Dec-2014
  46. Corporate Governance and Directors' Liability Chris Goode 19-Aug-2014
  47. Paper Presented on 2 August 2014 at the Competition Law & Policy Institute of New Zealand 25th Annual Conference Chris Goode 05-Aug-2014
  48. Life in the Fast Lane Chris Goode 06-Jun-2014
  49. 2014 - Roaring Past Chris Goode 04-Jun-2014
  50. Commentary on Paper Delivered by Professor Andrew I Gavil at Commerce Commission Conference Chris Goode 18-Nov-2013
  51. America's Cup Wrap Up Chris Goode 04-Oct-2013
  52. Happiness, Living a Balanced Life and Legal Practice - Part II Chris Goode 15-Aug-2013
  53. America's Cup 2013 Chris Goode 01-Jul-2013
  54. Why the Rules of Evidence Matter in Civil Cases Chris Goode 11-Mar-2013
  55. The High Court in Review Chris Goode 07-Oct-2012
  56. "Criticism of Supreme Court needs to be put in context" as published in the New Zealand Herald 11 May 2012 Chris Goode 23-May-2012
  57. Recent Reform Reports Chris Goode 03-Apr-2012
  58. Happiness, Living a Balanced Life and Legal Practice Chris Goode 09-Jan-2012
  59. In Defence of the Supreme Court Chris Goode 12-Dec-2011
  60. Instructions - dont publish! Chris Goode 16-Nov-2011
  61. LEGAL COMMENTARY HOW GOOD IS OUR SUPREME COURT? Chris Goode 16-Nov-2011
  62. Cross Examination Notes Chris Goode 11-Nov-2011
  63. Are the independence of the Judiciary and the Rule of Law under threat? Chris Goode 16-Oct-2011
  64. Commentary on my commentary on Morse Chris Goode 14-Sep-2011
  65. The passing of three leaders of the Bar Chris Goode 14-Sep-2011
  66. How good is our Supreme Court? Chris Goode 08-Aug-2011

Georgia Racing

Website Managed by Generate Design