Bill of Rights Act – recent Supreme Court rulings

/
Content updates

Recent Supreme Court decisions have provided guidance on the approach the courts should take when assessing the reasonableness of limits to rights. Attorney-General v Chisnall looked at extended supervision orders and public protection orders made at the end of a sentence of imprisonment for specified offences.  Chief of Defence Force v Four Members of the Armed Forces considered vaccination mandates in the Defence Force.

Click on the links below to Statutory Interpretation for the detail:

[BR5.02B]: Justified limitations – Justifying limits: Attorney-General v Chisnall [2024] NZSC 178, [2024] 1 NZLR 768

[BR5.02B]: Justified limitations – Justifying limits: Chief of Defence Force v Four Members of the Armed Forces [2025] NZSC 34

[BR11.03]: Right to refuse to undergo medical treatment – Vaccination: Chief of Defence Force v Four Members of the Armed Forces [2025] NZSC 34 and NZDSOS Inc v Medical Council of New Zealand [2024] NZHC 3538

Tags
Commentary
Court Practice & Litigation
By Jason Bull
Senior Legal Editor – Analytical Law

Jason Bull is a Senior Legal Editor in the New Zealand Analytical Law team with over 20 years’ experience at Thomson Reuters. He has worked in the legislation, and books teams and more latterly with annotated commentary products.

Speak to a consultant

Can't find an answer to your question?
Contact our support team.

Contact us

Request training

Contact our team to arrange training.

Request training

Tell us what you think

We'd love to hear what you think
of our products and support.

Contact us