Thanks from me too, Gary. Your incisive comments should be spread far and wide. One fears the possibility of our SC thinking it’s a kissing cousin of the menace known as the USC.
Gary, I seem to recall that Geoffrey Palmer had it as a principle of legal drafting that the wording be left somewhat vague so that the courts could "interpret"it for themselves in the context of the case (this in contradistinction to the idea of applying clear law and firm principles to a particular context). If my recollection is correct, and given Palmer's influence as both teacher and legislator, could this help explain how a judge might one day come to proclaim that "the function of this Court [is] to declare the law of Aotearoa/New Zealand"?
Well said Gary. I enjoyed it in Law News and I am glad you have made your thoughts available to a wider audience. Para 110 of Ellis is a worry indeed.
Thanks from me too, Gary. Your incisive comments should be spread far and wide. One fears the possibility of our SC thinking it’s a kissing cousin of the menace known as the USC.
https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/about-the-judiciary/role-of-courts/government/
https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/about-the-judiciary/the-statement-of-principles
https://thelawassociation.nz/law-commission-publishes-roadmap-for-blending-tikanga-and-state-law/
Brilliant. Utterly irrefutable. How to get the Herald or MSM to publish it?
Gary, I seem to recall that Geoffrey Palmer had it as a principle of legal drafting that the wording be left somewhat vague so that the courts could "interpret"it for themselves in the context of the case (this in contradistinction to the idea of applying clear law and firm principles to a particular context). If my recollection is correct, and given Palmer's influence as both teacher and legislator, could this help explain how a judge might one day come to proclaim that "the function of this Court [is] to declare the law of Aotearoa/New Zealand"?