In this subpart,—

For the purposes of this subpart, a person is unavailable as a witness in a proceeding if the person—

Subsection (2) does not apply to a person whose statement is sought to be offered in evidence by a party who has caused the person to be unavailable in order to prevent the person from attending or giving evidence.

A hearsay statement is not admissible except—

A hearsay statement is admissible in any proceeding if—

This section is subject to sections 20 and 22.

A hearsay statement contained in a business record is admissible if—

This section is subject to sections 20 and 22.

In a civil proceeding, a hearsay statement in an affidavit made to support or oppose an application is admissible for the purposes of that application if, and to the extent that, the applicable rules of court require or permit a statement of that kind to be made in the affidavit.

In a civil proceeding, a hearsay statement in a document by which documents are discovered or interrogatories are answered is admissible in that proceeding if, and to the extent that, the applicable rules of court require or permit the making of a statement of that kind.

If a defendant in a criminal proceeding does not give evidence, the defendant may not offer his or her own hearsay statement in evidence in the proceeding.

To avoid any doubt, this section does not limit the previous consistent statement rule.

In a criminal proceeding, no hearsay statement may be offered in evidence unless—

A party who proposes to offer a hearsay statement in a criminal proceeding, must provide every other party with a written notice stating—

If the hearsay statement was made in writing, the notice must be accompanied by a copy of the document in which the statement is contained.

The requirements of subsections (2) and (3) must be complied with in sufficient time before the hearing to provide all other parties to the proceeding with a fair opportunity to respond to the statement.

The Judge may dispense with the requirements of subsections (2), (3), and (4) if,—

In a criminal proceeding, a hearsay statement is admissible against a defendant if—

A statement of an opinion is not admissible in a proceeding, except as provided by section 24 or 25.

A witness may state an opinion in evidence in a proceeding if that opinion is necessary to enable the witness to communicate, or the fact-finder to understand, what the witness saw, heard, or otherwise perceived.

An opinion by an expert that is part of expert evidence offered in a proceeding is admissible if the fact-finder is likely to obtain substantial help from the opinion in understanding other evidence in the proceeding or in ascertaining any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the proceeding.

An opinion by an expert is not inadmissible simply because it is about—

If an opinion by an expert is based on a fact that is outside the general body of knowledge that makes up the expertise of the expert, the opinion may be relied on by the fact-finder only if that fact is or will be proved or judicially noticed in the proceeding.

If expert evidence about the sanity of a person is based in whole or in part on a statement that the person made to the expert about the person’s state of mind, then—

Subsection (3) is subject to subsection (4).

In a civil proceeding, experts are to conduct themselves in preparing and giving expert evidence in accordance with the applicable rules of court relating to the conduct of experts.

The expert evidence of an expert who has not complied with rules of court of the kind specified in subsection (1) may be given only with the permission of the Judge.

Evidence offered by the prosecution in a criminal proceeding of a statement made by a defendant is admissible against that defendant, and is admissible against a co-defendant in the proceeding only if it is admitted under section 22A.

However, evidence offered under subsection (1) is not admissible against that defendant if it is excluded under section 28, 29, or 30.

Subpart 1 (hearsay evidence) except section 22A, subpart 2 (opinion evidence and expert evidence), and section 35 (previous consistent statements rule) do not apply to evidence offered under subsection (1).

This section applies to a criminal proceeding in which the prosecution offers or proposes to offer a statement of a defendant if—

The Judge must exclude the statement unless satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the circumstances in which the statement was made were not likely to have adversely affected its reliability.

However, subsection (2) does not have effect to exclude a statement made by a defendant if the statement is offered only as evidence of the physical, mental, or psychological condition of the defendant at the time the statement was made or as evidence of whether the statement was made.

Without limiting the matters that a Judge may take into account for the purpose of applying subsection (2), the Judge must, in each case, take into account any of the following matters that are relevant to the case:

This section applies to a criminal proceeding in which the prosecution offers or proposes to offer a statement of a defendant if—

The Judge must exclude the statement unless satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the statement was not influenced by oppression.

For the purpose of applying this section, it is irrelevant whether or not the statement is true.

Without limiting the matters that a Judge may take into account for the purpose of applying subsection (2), the Judge must, in each case, take into account any of the following matters that are relevant to the case:

In this section, oppression means—

This section applies to a criminal proceeding in which the prosecution offers or proposes to offer evidence if—

The Judge must—

For the purposes of subsection (2), the court may, among any other matters, have regard to the following:

The Judge must exclude any improperly obtained evidence if, in accordance with subsection (2), the Judge determines that its exclusion is proportionate to the impropriety.

For the purposes of this section, evidence is improperly obtained if it is obtained—

Without limiting subsection (5)(c), in deciding whether a statement obtained by a member of the Police has been obtained unfairly for the purposes of that provision, the Judge must take into account guidelines set out in practice notes on that subject issued by the Chief Justice.

Evidence that is liable to be excluded if offered by the prosecution in a criminal proceeding because of section 28 or 29 or 30 may not be relied on by the prosecution if that evidence is offered by any other party.

This section applies to a criminal proceeding in which it appears that the defendant failed—

If subsection (1) applies,—

This section does not apply if the fact that the defendant did not answer a question put, or respond to a statement made, before the trial is a fact required to be proved in the proceeding.

In a criminal proceeding, no person other than the defendant or the defendant’s counsel or the Judge may comment on the fact that the defendant did not give evidence at his or her trial.

Subpart 1 (hearsay evidence), subpart 2 (opinion evidence and expert evidence), and section 35 (the previous consistent statements rule) do not apply to evidence of an admission offered in a civil proceeding that is—

Evidence of an admission that is a hearsay statement may not be used in respect of the case of a third party unless—

In this section, third party means a party to the proceeding concerned, other than the party who—

A previous statement of a witness that is consistent with the witness’s evidence is not admissible unless subsection (2) applies to the statement.

A previous statement of a witness that is consistent with the witness’s evidence is admissible if the statement—

This subpart does not apply to evidence about a person’s veracity if that veracity is an ingredient of the claim in a civil proceeding or one of the elements of the offence for which a person is being tried in a criminal proceeding.

This subpart does not apply so far as a proceeding relates to bail or sentencing.

Subsection (2) is subject to section 44.

A party may not offer evidence in a civil or criminal proceeding about a person’s veracity unless the evidence is substantially helpful in assessing that person’s veracity.

In a criminal proceeding, evidence about a defendant’s veracity must also comply with section 38 or, as the case requires, section 39.

In deciding, for the purposes of subsection (1), whether or not evidence proposed to be offered about the veracity of a person is substantially helpful, the Judge may consider, among any other matters, whether the proposed evidence tends to show 1 or more of the following matters:

A party who calls a witness—

For the purposes of this Act, veracity means the disposition of a person to refrain from lying.

A defendant in a criminal proceeding may offer evidence about his or her veracity.

The prosecution in a criminal proceeding may offer evidence about a defendant’s veracity only if—

In determining whether to give permission under subsection (2)(b), the Judge may take into account any of the following matters:

A defendant in a criminal proceeding may offer evidence that challenges the veracity of a co-defendant only if—

A defendant in a criminal proceeding who proposes to offer evidence that challenges the veracity of a co-defendant must give notice in writing to that co-defendant and every other co-defendant of the proposal to offer that evidence unless the requirement to give notice is waived by—

A notice must—

In this section and sections 41 to 43, propensity evidence—

A party may offer propensity evidence in a civil or criminal proceeding about any person.

However, propensity evidence about—

Evidence that is solely or mainly relevant to veracity is governed by the veracity rules set out in section 37 and, accordingly, this section does not apply to evidence of that kind.

A defendant in a criminal proceeding may offer propensity evidence about himself or herself.

If a defendant offers propensity evidence about himself or herself, the prosecution or another party may, with the permission of the Judge, offer propensity evidence about that defendant.

Section 43 does not apply to propensity evidence offered by the prosecution under subsection (2).

A defendant in a criminal proceeding may offer propensity evidence about a co-defendant only if—

A defendant in a criminal proceeding who proposes to offer propensity evidence about a co-defendant must give notice in writing to that co-defendant and every other co-defendant of the proposal to offer that evidence unless the requirement to give notice is waived—

A notice must—

The prosecution may offer propensity evidence about a defendant in a criminal proceeding only if the evidence has a probative value in relation to an issue in dispute in the proceeding which outweighs the risk that the evidence may have an unfairly prejudicial effect on the defendant.

When assessing the probative value of propensity evidence, the Judge must take into account the nature of the issue in dispute.

When assessing the probative value of propensity evidence, the Judge may consider, among other matters, the following:

When assessing the prejudicial effect of evidence on the defendant, the Judge must consider, among any other matters,—

In a sexual case, no evidence can be given and no question can be put to a witness relating directly or indirectly to the sexual experience of the complainant with any person other than the defendant, except with the permission of the Judge.

Subsection (1) is subject to the requirements in section 44A.

In a sexual case, no evidence can be given and no question can be put to a witness that relates directly or indirectly to the reputation of the complainant in sexual matters.

In an application for permission under subsection (1), the Judge must not grant permission unless satisfied that the evidence or question is of such direct relevance to facts in issue in the proceeding, or the issue of the appropriate sentence, that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to exclude it.

The permission of the Judge is not required to rebut or contradict evidence given under subsection (1).

In a sexual case in which the defendant is charged as a party and cannot be convicted unless it is shown that another person committed a sexual offence against the complainant, subsection (1) does not apply to any evidence given, or any question put, that relates directly or indirectly to the sexual experience of the complainant with that other person.

This section does not authorise evidence to be given or any question to be put that could not be given or put apart from this section.

An application under section 44(1) must comply with subsections (2) to (5) (as relevant) unless—

A party who proposes to offer evidence about the sexual experience of a complainant must make a written application and the application must include—

A party who proposes to ask any question about the sexual experience of a complainant must make a written application and the application must include—

If any document is intended to be produced as evidence of the sexual experience of a complainant, the application required under subsection (2) must be accompanied by a copy of the document.

An application must be made and a copy of the application must be given to all other parties—

The Judge may dispense with any of the requirements in subsections (2) to (5) if,—

If a formal procedure is followed by officers of an enforcement agency in obtaining visual identification evidence of a person alleged to have committed an offence or there was a good reason for not following a formal procedure, that evidence is admissible in a criminal proceeding unless the defendant proves on the balance of probabilities that the evidence is unreliable.

If a formal procedure is not followed by officers of an enforcement agency in obtaining visual identification evidence of a person alleged to have committed an offence and there was no good reason for not following a formal procedure, that evidence is inadmissible in a criminal proceeding unless the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that the circumstances in which the identification was made have produced a reliable identification.

For the purposes of this section, a formal procedure is a procedure for obtaining visual identification evidence—

The circumstances referred to in the following paragraphs are good reasons for not following a formal procedure:

Voice identification evidence offered by the prosecution in a criminal proceeding is inadmissible unless the prosecution proves on the balance of probabilities that the circumstances in which the identification was made have produced a reliable identification.

When the fact that a person has committed an offence is relevant to an issue in a civil proceeding, proof that the person has been convicted of that offence is conclusive proof that the person committed the offence.

Despite subsection (1), if the conviction of a person is proved under that subsection, the Judge may, in exceptional circumstances,—

This section applies—

This section—

In a proceeding for defamation that is based on a statement to the effect that a person has committed an offence, proof that the person has been convicted of the offence is conclusive proof that the person committed the offence if the conviction—

Evidence of the fact that a person has been convicted of an offence is, if not excluded by any other provision of this Act, admissible in a criminal proceeding and proof that the person has been convicted of that offence is conclusive proof that the person committed the offence.

Despite subsection (1), if the conviction of a person is proved under that subsection, the Judge may, in exceptional circumstances,—

A party to a criminal proceeding who wishes to offer evidence of the fact that a person has been convicted of an offence must first inform the Judge of the purpose for which the evidence is to be offered.

Evidence of a judgment or a finding of fact in a civil proceeding is not admissible in a criminal proceeding or another civil proceeding to prove the existence of a fact that was in issue in the proceeding in which the judgment was given.

Evidence of a decision or a finding of fact by a tribunal is not admissible in any proceeding to prove the existence of a fact that was in issue in the matter before the tribunal.

This section does not affect the operation of—

In this subpart,—

A reference in this subpart to a communication or to any information includes a reference to a communication or to information contained in a document.

Despite subsection (2), in sections 60 to 63, information means a statement of fact or opinion to be given—

A reference in this subpart to a communication made or received by a person or an act carried out by a person includes a reference to a communication made or received or an act carried out by an authorised representative of that person on that person’s behalf.

However, subsection (4) does not apply to any of the following sections:

A Judge may order that evidence must not be given in a proceeding of a communication, information, opinion, or document in respect of which a person has a privilege conferred by this subpart and may make an order under this subsection—

A Judge may give a direction under section 69 (confidential information) or section 70 (matters of State) on the Judge’s own initiative or on the application of an interested person.

An application under subsection (1) or (2) may be made at any time either before or after any relevant proceeding is commenced.

A Judge may give any directions that are necessary to protect the confidentiality of, or limit the use that may be made of,—

A person who has a privilege conferred by any of sections 54 to 59 in respect of a communication or any information has the right to refuse to disclose in a proceeding—

A person who has a privilege conferred by section 60 or 64 in respect of information has the right to refuse to disclose in a proceeding the information.

A person who has a privilege conferred by any of sections 54 to 59 and 64 in respect of a communication, information, opinion, or document may require that the communication, information, opinion, or document not be disclosed in a proceeding—

If a communication, information, opinion, or document, in respect of which a person has a privilege conferred by any of sections 54 to 59 and 64, is in the possession of a person other than a person referred to in subsection (3), a Judge may, on the Judge’s own initiative or on the application of the person who has the privilege, order that the communication, information, opinion, or document not be disclosed in a proceeding.

This Act does not affect the general law governing legal professional privilege, so far as it applies to the determination of claims to that privilege that are made neither in the course of, nor for the purpose of, a proceeding.

A person who requests or obtains professional legal services from a legal adviser has a privilege in respect of any communication between the person and the legal adviser if the communication was—

The privilege applies to a person who requests professional legal services from a legal adviser whether or not the person actually obtains such services.

In this section, professional legal services means, in the case of a registered patent attorney or an overseas practitioner whose functions wholly or partly correspond to those of a registered patent attorney, requesting or obtaining or giving information or advice concerning intellectual property.

In subsection (2), intellectual property means 1 or more of the following matters:

This section applies to documents that are books of account or accounting records kept—

Section 54 does not prevent, limit, or affect—

Subsection (2) applies to a communication or information only if the communication or information is made, received, compiled, or prepared for the dominant purpose of preparing for a proceeding or an apprehended proceeding (the proceeding).

A person (the party) who is, or on reasonable grounds contemplates becoming, a party to the proceeding has a privilege in respect of—

If the proceeding is under, or to be under, Part 2 of the Oranga Tamariki Act 1989 or the Care of Children Act 2004 (other than a criminal proceeding under that Part or that Act), a Judge may, if satisfied that it is in the best interests of the child to do so, determine that subsection (2) does not apply in respect of any communication or information that the Judge specifies.

A person who is a party to, or a mediator in, a dispute of a kind for which relief may be given in a civil proceeding has a privilege in respect of any communication between that person and any other person who is a party to the dispute if the communication—

A person who is a party to a dispute of a kind for which relief may be given in a civil proceeding has a privilege in respect of a confidential document that the person has prepared, or caused to be prepared, in connection with an attempt to mediate the dispute or to negotiate a settlement of the dispute.

A person who is a party to a criminal proceeding has a privilege in respect of any communication or document made or prepared in connection with plea discussions in the proceeding.

However, the court may order the disclosure of the whole or any part of a communication or document privileged under subsection (2A) if the court considers that—

This section does not apply to—

A person has a privilege in respect of any communication between that person and a minister of religion if the communication was—

A person is a minister of religion for the purposes of this section if the person has a status within a church or other religious or spiritual community that requires or calls for that person—

This section—

For the purpose of applying subsection (1)(b), there is no privilege under this section in relation to any communication or information (other than any previous medical record or other previous medical information about the person) that is made or obtained for the purpose of the examination or test or for the other purpose concerned.

A person has a privilege in a criminal proceeding in respect of any communication made by the person to a medical practitioner or clinical psychologist that the person believes is necessary to enable the medical practitioner or clinical psychologist to examine, treat, or care for the person for drug dependency or any other condition or behaviour that may manifest itself in criminal conduct.

A person has a privilege in a criminal proceeding in respect of information obtained by a medical practitioner or clinical psychologist as a result of consulting with or examining the person to enable the medical practitioner or clinical psychologist to examine, treat, or care for the person for drug dependency or any other condition or behaviour that may manifest itself in criminal conduct.

A person has a privilege in a criminal proceeding in respect of information consisting of a prescription, or notes of a prescription, for treatment prescribed by a medical practitioner or clinical psychologist as a result of consulting with or examining the person to enable the medical practitioner or clinical psychologist to treat or care for the person for drug dependency or any other condition or behaviour that may manifest itself in criminal conduct.

A reference in this section to a communication to, or information obtained by, a medical practitioner or a clinical psychologist is to be taken to include a reference to a communication to, or information obtained by, a person acting in a professional capacity on behalf of a medical practitioner or clinical psychologist in the course of the examination or treatment of, or care for, the person by that medical practitioner or clinical psychologist.

In this section,—

This section applies if—

The person—

Subsection (2) has effect—

Subsection (2) does not enable a claim of privilege to be made—

This section is subject to section 63.

This section applies to any specific information—

A Judge may direct that the person cannot be required to provide the information if the Judge, after having regard to the likelihood of extradition and other relevant matters, thinks that it would be unreasonable to require the person to incriminate himself or herself by providing the information.

Subsection (2) does not enable a Judge to give a direction in respect of—

If in a court proceeding it appears to the Judge that a party or witness may have grounds to claim a privilege against self-incrimination in respect of specific information required to be provided by that person, the Judge must satisfy himself or herself that the person is aware of the privilege and its effect.

A person who claims a privilege against self-incrimination in a court proceeding must offer sufficient evidence to enable the Judge to assess whether self-incrimination is reasonably likely if the person provides the required information.

This section applies to a person who is required by an order of the court made for the purposes of a civil proceeding—

The person does not have the privilege provided for by section 60 and must comply with the terms of the order.

No evidence of any information that has directly or indirectly been obtained as a result of the person’s compliance with the order may be used against the person in any criminal proceeding, except in a criminal proceeding that concerns the falsity of the information.

An informer has a privilege in respect of information that would disclose, or is likely to disclose, the informer’s identity.

A person is an informer for the purposes of this section if the person—

An informer may be a member of the Police working undercover.

A person who has a privilege conferred by any of sections 54 to 60 and 64 may waive that privilege either expressly or impliedly.

A person who has a privilege waives the privilege if that person, or anyone with the authority of that person, voluntarily produces or discloses, or consents to the production or disclosure of, any significant part of the privileged communication, information, opinion, or document in circumstances that are inconsistent with a claim of confidentiality.

A person who has a privilege waives the privilege if the person—

A person who has a privilege in respect of a communication, information, opinion, or document that has been disclosed to another person does not waive the privilege if the disclosure occurred involuntarily or mistakenly or otherwise without the consent of the person who has the privilege.

A privilege conferred by section 57 (which relates to settlement negotiations or mediation) may be waived only by all the persons who have that privilege.

A person who jointly with some other person or persons has a privilege conferred by any of sections 54 to 60 and 64 in respect of a communication, information, opinion, or document—

On or after the death of a person who has a privilege conferred by any of sections 54 to 57 in respect of a communication, information, opinion, or document, the personal representative of the deceased person or other successor in title to property of the deceased person—

However, subsection (2) applies only to the extent that a Judge is satisfied that the personal representative or other successor in title to property has a justifiable interest in maintaining the privilege in respect of the communication, information, opinion, or document.

A personal representative of a deceased person who has a privilege conferred by any of sections 54 to 57 in respect of a communication, information, opinion, or document and any other successor in title to property of a person who has such a privilege, may, on the application of a person who has a legitimate interest in maintaining the privilege (including another holder of the privilege), be ordered by a Judge not to disclose the privileged matter in a proceeding.

A Judge must disallow a claim of privilege conferred by any of sections 54 to 59 and 64 in respect of a communication or information if satisfied there is a prima facie case that the communication was made or received, or the information was compiled or prepared, for a dishonest purpose or to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to commit what the person claiming the privilege knew, or reasonably should have known, to be an offence.

A Judge may disallow a claim of privilege conferred by any of sections 54 to 59 and 64 in respect of a communication or information if the Judge is of the opinion that evidence of the communication or information is necessary to enable the defendant in a criminal proceeding to present an effective defence.

Any communication or information disclosed as the result of the disallowance of a claim of privilege under subsection (2) and any information derived from that disclosure cannot be used against the holder of the privilege in a proceeding in New Zealand.

If a journalist has promised an informant not to disclose the informant’s identity, neither the journalist nor his or her employer is compellable in a civil or criminal proceeding to answer any question or produce any document that would disclose the identity of the informant or enable that identity to be discovered.

A Judge of the High Court may order that subsection (1) is not to apply if satisfied by a party to a civil or criminal proceeding that, having regard to the issues to be determined in that proceeding, the public interest in the disclosure of evidence of the identity of the informant outweighs—

The Judge may make the order subject to any terms and conditions that the Judge thinks appropriate.

This section does not affect the power or authority of the House of Representatives.

In this section,—

A direction under this section is a direction that any 1 or more of the following not be disclosed in a proceeding:

A Judge may give a direction under this section if the Judge considers that the public interest in the disclosure in the proceeding of the communication or information is outweighed by the public interest in—

When considering whether to give a direction under this section, the Judge must have regard to—

The Judge may, in addition to the matters stated in subsection (3), have regard to any other matters that the Judge considers relevant.

A Judge may give a direction under this section that a communication or information not be disclosed whether or not the communication or information is privileged by another provision of this subpart or would, except for a limitation or restriction imposed by this subpart, be privileged.

A Judge may direct that a communication or information that relates to matters of State must not be disclosed in a proceeding if the Judge considers that the public interest in the communication or information being disclosed in the proceeding is outweighed by the public interest in withholding the communication or information.

A communication or information that relates to matters of State includes a communication or information—

A Judge may give a direction under this section that a communication or information not be disclosed whether or not the communication or information is privileged by another provision of this subpart or would, except for a limitation or restriction imposed by this subpart, be privileged.

In a civil or criminal proceeding,—

Subsection (1) is subject to sections 72 to 75.

A person who is acting as a Judge in a proceeding is not eligible to give evidence in that proceeding.

A person who is acting as a juror or counsel in a proceeding is not eligible to give evidence in that proceeding except with the permission of the Judge.

In this section, counsel includes an employment advocate.

A defendant in a criminal proceeding is not a compellable witness for the prosecution or the defence in that proceeding.

An associated defendant is not compellable to give evidence for or against a defendant in a criminal proceeding unless—

A proceeding has been determined for the purposes of subsection (2) if—

In this section, associated defendant, in relation to a defendant in a criminal proceeding, means a person against whom a prosecution has been instituted for—

None of the following persons is compellable to give evidence:

In any proceedings to which a bank is not a party, no officer of the bank is compellable—

Subsection (1) is subject to any contrary order of a Judge made for a special reason.

In this section, bank means—

A person must not give evidence about the deliberations of a jury.

Subsection (1) does not prevent the giving of evidence about matters that do not form part of the deliberations of a jury, including (without limitation)—

Subsection (1) does not prevent a person from giving evidence about the deliberations of a jury if the Judge is satisfied that the particular circumstances are so exceptional that there is a sufficiently compelling reason to allow that evidence to be given.

In determining, under subsection (3), whether to allow evidence to be given in any proceedings, the Judge must weigh—

A witness in a proceeding who is of or over the age of 12 years must take an oath or make an affirmation before giving evidence.

A witness in a proceeding who is under the age of 12 years—

Evidence given by a witness to whom subsection (2) applies must be treated in the same manner as if that evidence had been given on oath.

Despite subsections (1) and (2), a witness—

A person must either take an oath or make an affirmation before acting as an interpreter in a proceeding.

A complainant, when giving evidence in a criminal proceeding, is entitled to have 1 person, and may, with the permission of the Judge, have more than 1 person, near him or her to give support.

A child witness, when giving evidence in a criminal proceeding, is entitled to have 1 person, and may, with the permission of the Judge, have more than 1 person, near him or her to give support.

Any other witness, when giving evidence in any proceeding, may with the permission of the Judge, have 1 or more support persons near him or her to give support.

Subsections (1), (1A), and (2) apply whether the witness or complainant gives evidence in an alternative way or in the ordinary way.

Despite subsections (1), (1A), and (2), the Judge may, in the interests of justice, direct that support may not be given to a complainant or a child witness or other witness by—

A complainant or a child witness or other witness who is to have a support person near him or her while giving evidence must, unless the Judge orders otherwise, disclose to all parties as soon as practicable the name of each person who is to provide that support.

The Judge may give directions regulating the conduct of a person providing or receiving support under this section.

A defendant in a criminal proceeding is entitled to communication assistance, in accordance with this section and any regulations made under this Act, to—

Communication assistance may be provided to a defendant in a criminal proceeding on the application of the defendant in the proceeding or on the initiative of the Judge.

A witness in a civil or criminal proceeding is entitled to communication assistance in accordance with this section and any regulations made under this Act to enable that witness to give evidence.

Communication assistance may be provided to a witness on the application of the witness or any party to the proceeding or on the initiative of the Judge.

Any statement made in court to a Judge or a witness by a person providing communication assistance must, if known by the person making that statement to be false and intended by that person to be misleading, be treated as perjury for the purposes of sections 108 and 109 of the Crimes Act 1961.

Communication assistance need not be provided to a defendant in a criminal proceeding if the Judge considers that the defendant—

Communication assistance need not be provided to a witness in a civil or a criminal proceeding if the Judge considers that the witness can sufficiently understand questions put orally and can adequately respond to them.

The Judge may direct what kind of communication assistance is to be provided to a defendant or a witness.

If, in any proceeding, the Judge considers that a view is in the interests of justice, the Judge may—

A view may be held or ordered on the application of any party or on the Judge’s own initiative.

If there is a jury, a view may be ordered to be held at any time before the jury retires, and the Judge may order a further view of the same place or thing during the jury’s deliberations.

If there is not a jury, the Judge may hold a view at any time before judgment is delivered.

Information obtained at a view may be used as though that information had been given in evidence.

Every party, including the defendant in a criminal proceeding, and lawyers for the parties, is entitled to attend a view, but any party, or that party’s lawyer, may waive that entitlement.

In this section, view means an inspection by the Judge or, if there is a jury, by the Judge and jury, of a place or thing that is not in the courtroom.

The ordinary way for a witness to give evidence is,—

An affidavit or a written statement referred to in subsection (1)(b) or (c) may be given in evidence only if it—

Unless this Act or any other enactment provides otherwise, or the Judge directs to the contrary, in any proceeding—

If a witness gives evidence in an affidavit or by reading a written statement in a courtroom, it is to be treated for the purposes of this Act as evidence given in chief.

In any proceeding, the Judge may disallow, or direct that a witness is not obliged to answer, any question that the Judge considers improper, unfair, misleading, needlessly repetitive, or expressed in language that is too complicated for the witness to understand.

Without limiting the matters that the Judge may take into account for the purposes of subsection (1), the Judge may have regard to—

A person commits a contempt of court who prints or publishes,—

In any proceeding, the precise particulars of a witness’s address (for example, details of the street and number) may not, without the permission of the Judge, be—

The Judge must not grant permission under subsection (1) unless satisfied that the question to be put, the evidence to be given, or the statement or remark to be made, is of sufficient direct relevance to the facts in issue that to exclude it would be contrary to the interests of justice.

An application for permission under subsection (1) may be made before or after the commencement of any hearing, and is, where practicable, to be made and dealt with in chambers.

Nothing in subsection (1) applies in a criminal proceeding if it is necessary to disclose the particulars in the charge in order to ensure that the defendant is fully and fairly informed of the charge.

In a sexual case, except with the permission of the Judge,—

The Judge must not grant permission under subsection (1) unless satisfied that the question to be put, the evidence to be given, or the statement or remark to be made, is of sufficient direct relevance to the facts in issue that to exclude it would be contrary to the interests of justice.

An application for permission under subsection (1) may be made before or after the commencement of any hearing, and is, where practicable, to be made and dealt with in chambers.

In any proceeding, a leading question must not be put to a witness in examination in chief or re-examination unless—

Subsection (1) does not prevent a Judge, if permitted by rules of court, from allowing a written statement or report of a witness to be tendered or treated as the evidence in chief of that person.

A party must not, for the purpose of questioning a witness in a proceeding, use a document that has been excluded under section 28, 29, or 30.

A witness must not consult a document that has been excluded under section 28, 29, or 30 while giving evidence.

If when questioning a witness a party proposes to use a document or to show a document to the witness, that document must be shown to every other party to the proceeding.

If a witness proposes to consult a document while giving evidence,—

For the purposes of refreshing his or her memory while giving evidence, a witness may, with the prior leave of the Judge, consult a document made or adopted at a time when his or her memory was fresh.

Subsection (5) is subject to subsection (2).

A previous statement of a witness that is consistent with a witness’s evidence is admissible if—

If a statement is determined by the Judge to be inadmissible in part in a proceeding, a party who wishes to use an admissible part of the statement may, subject to the direction of the Judge, edit the statement by excluding any part of it that is inadmissible.

A party may not edit a statement under subsection (1) unless, in the opinion of the Judge, the inadmissible parts of the statement can be excluded without obscuring or confusing the meaning of the admissible part of the statement.

In any proceeding, a party must cross-examine a witness on significant matters that are relevant and in issue and that contradict the evidence of the witness, if the witness could reasonably be expected to be in a position to give admissible evidence on those matters.

If a party fails to comply with this section, the Judge may—

If a party in any proceeding cross-examines a witness who has the same, or substantially the same, interest in the proceeding as the cross-examining party, the Judge may, in the interests of justice, limit the extent to which leading questions may be asked in that cross-examination.

In any proceeding, the party who calls a witness may, if the Judge determines that the witness is hostile and gives permission, cross-examine the witness to the extent authorised by the Judge.

A defendant in a sexual case, or a defendant in or a party to criminal or civil proceedings concerning family violence or harassment, is not entitled to personally cross-examine—

In a civil or criminal proceeding, a Judge may, on the application of a witness, or a party calling a witness, or on the Judge’s own initiative, order that a party to the proceeding must not personally cross-examine the witness.

An order under subsection (2) may be made on 1 or more of the following grounds:

When considering whether or not to make an order under subsection (2), the Judge must have regard to—

A defendant or party to a proceeding who, under this section, is precluded from personally cross-examining a witness may have his or her questions put to the witness by—

In respect of each such question, the Judge may—

Subsection (1) overrides section 11 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011.

A party who cross-examines a witness may question the witness about a previous statement made by that witness without showing it or disclosing its contents to the witness if the time, place, and other circumstances concerning the making of the statement are adequately identified to the witness.

If a witness does not expressly admit making the statement and the party wishes to prove that the witness did make the statement,—

If a document is used by a defendant for the purpose of cross-examining a witness but is not offered as evidence by that defendant, the following rights of the defendant are not affected:

On re-examination, a witness—

If permission is given by the Judge under subsection (1), the Judge—

In any proceeding, a party may not offer further evidence after closing that party’s case, except with the permission of the Judge.

In a civil proceeding, the Judge may not grant permission under subsection (1) if any unfairness caused to any other party by the granting of permission cannot be remedied by an adjournment or an award of costs, or both.

In a criminal proceeding, the Judge may grant permission to the prosecution under subsection (1) if—

In a criminal proceeding, the Judge may grant permission to a defendant under subsection (1) if the interests of justice require the further evidence to be admitted.

The Judge may grant permission under subsection (1),—

In any proceeding, the Judge may recall a witness who has given evidence if the Judge considers that it is in the interests of justice to do so.

The Judge may recall a witness under subsection (1),—

In any proceeding, the Judge may ask a witness any questions that, in the opinion of the Judge, justice requires.

If the Judge questions a witness,—

If a jury wishes to put a question to a witness in a proceeding,—

If a question from the jury is put to a witness, then, subject to any determination made by the Judge under subsection (1)(b)(ii),—

Sections 103 to 106 (which provide for alternative ways of giving evidence) are subject to the following provisions (which deal with specific situations):

Nothing in the Courts (Remote Participation) Act 2010 affects or limits the ability of—

In any proceeding, the Judge may, either on the application of a party or on the Judge’s own initiative, direct that a witness is to give evidence in chief and be cross-examined in the ordinary way or in an alternative way as provided in section 105.

An application for directions under subsection (1) must be made to the Judge as early as practicable before the proceeding is to be heard, or at any later time permitted by the court.

A direction under subsection (1) that a witness is to give evidence in an alternative way, may be made on the grounds of—

In giving directions under subsection (1), the Judge must have regard to—

If an application for directions is made under section 103, before giving any directions about the way in which a witness is to give evidence in chief and be cross-examined, the Judge—

A Judge may direct, under section 103, that the evidence of a witness is to be given in an alternative way so that—

If a video record of the witness’s evidence is to be shown at the hearing of the proceeding, the Judge must give directions under section 103 as to the manner in which cross-examination and re-examination of the witness is to be conducted.

The Judge may admit evidence that is given substantially in accordance with the terms of a direction under section 103, despite a failure to observe strictly all of those terms.