Best v R
| Jurisdiction | New Zealand |
| Neutral Citation | [2016] NZSC 122 |
| Year | 2016 |
| Date | 2016 |
| Court | Supreme Court |
-
- 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
15 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, ......
-
Mark Edward Lundy v R
...[59] and [74], in which the Board applied Matenga, finding that their Lordships were left with no reasonable doubt about guilt. Best v R [2016] NZSC 122, [2017] 1 NZLR 186 at [96], n 83 per Elias CJ, Glazebrook, Arnold and O’Regan JJ. See also Cameron v R [2017] NZSC 89, [2018] 1 NZLR 161 a......
-
Bushby v R
...have a car it’s always been in the bush at, up at [a park] and she said I don’t know why I lied about him having a car. 7 See Best v R [2016] NZSC 122, [2017] 1 NZLR Mr Bushby’s submissions were directed only to the fact that the parents said their daughter had initially been untruthful, bu......
-
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 don’t know why he would say [E] was my boyfriend in 2012, when I was [attendi......
Request a trial to view additional results