R v Rongonui

JurisdictionNew Zealand
CourtCourt of Appeal
Year2000
Date2000

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
6 cases
  • Holley v AG
    • United Kingdom
    • Privy Council
    • 15 June 2005
    ...in this regard have been exaggerated". I am rather in wholehearted agreement with the remark of Thomas J in the New Zealand case of R v Rongonui [2000] 2 NZLR 385, 446 that most trial judges had seen "the glazed look in the jurors' eyes as, immediately after instructing them that it is ope......
  • Mahomed v R Sc
    • New Zealand
    • Supreme Court
    • 19 May 2011
    ...now provides: 40 Propensity rule (1) 27 28 29 30 31 32 In this section and sections 41 to 43, propensity evidence— As in R v Rongonui [2000] 2 NZLR 385 T (CA 175/97) v Attorney-General CA175/97, 27 August 1997. See for instance R v Meynell [2004] 1 NZLR 507 (CA) at [23]. R v Karetai (1988) ......
  • Mahomed v R
    • New Zealand
    • Court of Appeal
    • 14 September 2010
    ...Evidence and Opinion Evidence (NZLC PP18, 1991) at [61]-[66]; R v Gwaze [2010] NZSC 52, (2010) 24 CRNZ 702 at [47]. 8R v Rongonui [2000] 2 NZLR 385 (CA), R v Rapira [2003] 3 NZLR 794 (CA), and R v Zhou [2007] NZCA 104. 9R v Frost [2008] NZCA 406. 10R v Martin CA199/04, 14 February 2005. 11 ......
  • Hksar v Liang Yaoqiang
    • Hong Kong
    • Court of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
    • 7 February 2017
    ...in the application of the objective test, the effect of like provocation on “the ordinary person”. [29] 44. Similarly, in R v Rongonui [2000] 2 NZLR 385, in his observations as to the appropriate directions to a jury in a case of provocation, Tipping J described the appropriate manner in wh......
  • Get Started for Free
2 books & journal articles
  • Criminal Law
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review No. 2000, December 2000
    • 1 December 2000
    ...by our Court of Appeal has also been made by the highest courts in Australia (Stingel v R(1990) 171 CLR 312); New Zealand (R v Rongonui[2000] 2 NZLR 385) and Canada (R v Hill[1986] 1 SCR 313). However, the House of Lords in England has recently taken a completely opposite stance in R v Smit......
  • Innocent Victims and Vulnerable Offenders: Defending Impaired Adults Who Kill Children
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 83-5, October 2019
    • 1 October 2019
    ...including R v McCarthy [1992] 2 NZLR 550, (1992) 8 CRNZ 58 (CA), R v Campbell [1997] 1 NZLR16, (1996) 14 CRNZ 117 (CA), R v Rongonui [2000] 2 NZLR 385 (CA) and R v Makoare [2001] 1 NZLR 318, (2000) 18CRNZ 511 (CA). It is unlikely at this stage that the legislature would be willing to re-ena......