This Act is the Habeas Corpus Act 2001.

This Act comes into force on the day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent.

In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—

This Act binds the Crown.

Nothing in this Act limits or affects the power or authority of the House of Representatives to punish for contempt.

The purposes of this Act are—

An application to challenge the legality of a person’s detention may be made by an application for a writ of habeas corpus.

An application for a writ of habeas corpus must be made to the High Court by originating application in the manner provided by the High Court Rules 2016.

Despite subsection (1), nothing in that subsection excludes the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court to hear and to make an order on an oral application at any time in circumstances of unusual urgency.

Despite subsection (1), the provisions of any High Court Rule providing for directions by the court before the hearing, or affecting the hearing, of an originating application or empowering the court to convene a conference of the parties to an originating application do not apply to an application.

No applicant may be disqualified for lack of capacity or standing.

In a proceeding for a writ of habeas corpus—

No fee is payable to the High Court for filing any document in respect of an application.

Section 153 of the Senior Courts Act 2016 does not apply in respect of the form and manner of any application made under this Act.

A defendant may be described in an application by reference only to the defendant’s office if the defendant is—

An application for a writ of habeas corpus must be given precedence over all other matters before the High Court unless a Judge of that court considers that the circumstances require otherwise.

Judges and employees of the Ministry of Justice must ensure that every application, including any interlocutory application, is disposed of as a matter of priority and urgency.

The Registrar must allocate a date for the inter partes hearing of an application that is no later than 3 working days after the date on which the application is filed.

If an application is filed at a Registry of the High Court in a place where no Judge is at that time available, the Registrar must ensure that the application is dealt with in some other place within the time limit referred to in section 9(3); and any other Registrar or employee of the Ministry of Justice whose assistance is sought by the Registrar in whose Registry the application is filed has a corresponding obligation.

If subsection (1) applies, the Registrar must—

This section applies in substitution for any provision of the High Court Rules 2016 relating to the transfer of notices of application filed at a time when a Judge is not present.

The High Court may make an interim order for the release from detention of the detained person pending final determination of the application, and may attach any conditions to the order that the court thinks appropriate to the circumstances.

In the case of a detained person who is charged with an offence to which the Bail Act 2000 applies, the court must not make an order under this section if the court is of the opinion that bail would not be granted to that person under that Act.

If a person has been released from detention under an interim order, the court may, on the application of the person released or any party to the proceeding or on the court’s own initiative, make an order—

If a detained person who is in custody under a conviction is released under an interim order, the time during which the person is released does not count as part of any term of detention under the person’s sentence if on a final determination of the application the writ of habeas corpus is refused.

A constable may arrest without warrant a person who has been released from detention under an interim order made under section 11 if the constable believes on reasonable grounds that—

A person who is arrested under this section must be brought before the High Court as soon as possible.

The court may revoke the interim order if it is satisfied that the person had absconded or was about to abscond or had failed to comply with a condition attached to the interim order or an undertaking to the court in reliance on which the interim order was made.

A constable may, for the purposes of this section, enter at any time onto any premises, by force if necessary, if the constable has reasonable cause to believe that the person released from detention is on those premises.

If the constable is not in uniform and a person in actual occupation of the premises requires the constable to produce evidence of his or her authority, the constable must, before entering on the premises, produce his or her badge or other evidence of membership of the Police.

In dealing with an application in relation to a detained person who is under the age of 18 years, the High Court may exercise the powers that are conferred on the Family Court by the Care of Children Act 2004.

If the substantive issue in an application is the welfare of a person under the age of 16 years, the High Court may, on its own initiative or at the request of a party to the proceeding, transfer the application to the Family Court.

An application referred under subsection (2) must be dealt with by the Family Court in all respects as if it were an application to that court under the Care of Children Act 2004.

If the defendant fails to establish that the detention of the detained person is lawful, the High Court must grant as a matter of right a writ of habeas corpus ordering the release of the detained person from detention.

Despite subsection (1), the High Court may refuse an application for the issue of the writ, without requiring the defendant to establish that the detention of the detained person is lawful, if the court is satisfied that—

A Judge dealing with an application must enquire into the matters of fact and law claimed to justify the detention and is not confined in that enquiry to the correction of jurisdictional errors; but this subsection does not entitle a Judge to call into question—

Subject to section 13(2), a Judge must determine an application by—

All matters relating to the costs of and incidental to an application are in the discretion of the court and the court may refuse costs to a successful party or order a successful party to pay costs to an unsuccessful party.

A writ of habeas corpus may be in the form set out in the Schedule.

To avoid doubt, an application for a writ of habeas corpus is a civil proceeding for the purposes of the Courts (Remote Participation) Act 2010.

Subject to the rights of appeal conferred by section 16 of this Act and to sections 68 to 71 of the Senior Courts Act 2016, the determination of an application is final and no further application can be made by any person either to the same or to a different Judge on grounds requiring a re-examination by the court of substantially the same questions as those considered by the court when the earlier application was refused.

A person who has been released from detention in accordance with a writ of habeas corpus must not be re-arrested or detained again on substantially the same grounds as those considered by the court when the earlier release was ordered.

Subsection (2) has no application if the ground on which the earlier release was ordered was a jurisdictional or procedural defect that has since been corrected or no longer applies.

The provisions of the Senior Courts Act 2016 relating to appeals to the Court of Appeal against decisions of the High Court in civil cases—

With the leave of the Supreme Court, a party to the proceeding in which the determination was made may appeal to the Supreme Court—

The court cannot order that security for costs be given by the appellant in an appeal against the refusal of an application where the respondent in the appeal is the Crown or a public officer or other person purporting to act on behalf of the Crown.

No fee is payable to the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court for filing any document in respect of an appeal against the refusal of an application.

An appeal under this Act must be given precedence over all other matters before the Court of Appeal unless that court or a Judge of that court considers that the circumstances require otherwise.

The following must be given precedence over all other matters before the Supreme Court unless that court or a Judge of that court considers that the circumstances require otherwise:

Judges of the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court, and employees of the Ministry of Justice, must use their best endeavours to ensure that every appeal under this Act or paragraph (a) or paragraph (b) of section 16(1A) is disposed of as a matter of priority and urgency.

It is declared for the avoidance of doubt that all writs of habeas corpus other than the writ of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum are abolished.

Subpart 2 of Part 2 and sections 25 and 26(1) and (2) of the Contempt of Court Act 2019 apply with the necessary modifications to a person who wilfully hinders the prompt disposal of an application.

Subpart 4 of Part 2 and sections 25 and 26(1) and (2) of the Contempt of Court Act 2019 apply with the necessary modifications to a person who,—

Subpart 4 of Part 2 and sections 25 and 26(1) and (2) of the Contempt of Court Act 2019 apply, as if the application were a court order, to a person who is aware that an application has been made to the High Court seeking the release from detention of a person and removes or attempts to remove that person from the jurisdiction of the court.

Rules not inconsistent with this Act may be made under section 148 of the Senior Courts Act 2016 regulating the practice and procedure of the High Court and the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court in relation to applications under this Act.

Without limiting subsection (1), rules may be made under section 148 of the Senior Courts Act 2016 that amend the form in the Schedule or replace the form.

If a matter arises in relation to an application for which this Act does not provide, the High Court must dispose of it as nearly as is practicable in a manner consistent with this Act, and to the extent that they are not inconsistent with this Act, in accordance with the High Court Rules 2016.

Amendment(s) incorporated in the Act(s).

Sections 17 to 19, and 21 of the Interpretation Act 1999 apply to the enactments referred to in subsection (2) as if those enactments were Acts of the Parliament of New Zealand.