Best v R
| Jurisdiction | New Zealand |
| Court | Supreme Court |
| Neutral Citation | [2016] NZSC 122 |
| Date | 2016 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
12 cases
-
Mark Edward Lundy v R
...that is another way of saying that the appellate court must be sure of the defendant's guilt. 34 The Court affirmed that proposition in Best v R, stating that: 35 It has recently been suggested that the fact an appellate court is satisfied of guilt is not sufficient. The court, it is said, ......
-
Arona & Chambers v R
...false complaint goes to veracity, there would need to be an evidential foundation suggesting possible falsehood.9 6 7 8 9 Best v R [2016] NZSC 122, [2017] 1 NZLR B (SC12/2013) v R [2013] NZSC 151, [2014] 1 NZLR 261 at [122(c)]. See also Morton v R [2013] NZCA 667 at [107] and [109]. See for......
-
Hohua v R
...or malicious. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Best v R [2015] NZCA 159; and R v C (CA391/07) [2007] NZCA 439. R v Hohua [2015] NZDC 21842 at [8]. Best v R [2016] NZSC 122, [2017] 1 NZLR At [55]. Section 40(4) provides: “Evidence that is solely or mainly relevant to veracity is governed by the veracity rules ......
-
M (CA401/2016) v R
...was provided to us by consent. In it he records the complainant saying: 5 6 7 8 9 At [28]. At [29]. Evidence Act, s 8. At [31]. Best v R [2016] NZSC 122. What? No. I have never made any claims that [E] raped me. I know why he would say that. [E] was my boyfriend in 2012, when I was [attendi......
Request a trial to view additional results