Print this page

Anna Elizabeth Osborne and Sonya Lynne Rockhouse v Worksafe New Zealand and District Court at Wellington - SC 23/2017

Media releases

Summary

Civil Appeal – Judicial review – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the first respondent had not exercised its prosecutorial discretion unlawfully or unreasonably – Whether the dismissal of charges by the second respondent was ultra vires because the Judge hearing the matter had earlier recused herself from the proceedings.

Result

A The application for leave to appeal is granted in part (Osborne v Worksafe New Zealand [2017] NZCA 11).
B Subject to the qualification discussed at [1], the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the applicants’ appeal to that Court.
19 June 2017
_______________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B A declaration is made that the decision of WorkSafe New Zealand to offer no evidence in the prosecution of Peter William Whittall was unlawful.
C Costs are reserved.  The parties may file memoranda by 31 January 2018 if an order for costs is sought.    
23 November 2017

Hearing Transcripts

Related Documents

High Court decision — OSBORNE & OR v WORKSAFE NZ & OR [2015] NZHC 2991 [27 November 2015]

Court of Appeal decision — OSBORNE & ROCKHOUSE v WORKSAFE NEW ZEALAND [2017] NZCA 11 [16 February 2017]

Leave judgment - leave granted — OSBORNE AND ROCKHOUSE v WORKSAFE NEW ZEALAND [2017] NZSC 90 [19 June 2017] (PDF 115 KB)

Substantive judgment — ANNA ELIZABETH OSBORNE AND SONYA LYNNE ROCKHOUSE v WORKSAFE NEW ZEALAND [2017] NZSC 175 [23 November 2017] (PDF 421 KB)