(New Zealand) The defendant had at a previous Privy Council appeal had his conviction for murder overturned. He now challenged the order for a retrial, saying that subsequent disclosures made this unfair.
Held: The order was refused. The applicant had a satisfactory alternative remedy which he must use.
When considering a request to re-open a decision: ‘What will be of the greatest importance is that it should be clearly established that a significant injustice has probably occurred and that there is no alternative effective remedy.’
Judges:
Lord Hoffmann, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Mance
Citations:
[2008] UKPC 6
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2) SC 29-Jun-2016
Undisclosed Matter inadequate to revisit decision
The claimant sought to have set aside a decision of the House of Lords as to the validity of the 2004 Order, saying that it had been based on a failure by the defendant properly to disclose matters it was under a duty of candour to disclose.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.320876
