This morning the Law Association’s LawNews published my criticisms of the Supreme Court’s purported judgment in the Edwards case under the title
The Edwards judgment: a nullity designed to pre-empt Parliament? I explain that what the Court called a judgment is not a judgment at all, but a pronouncement the Court had no jurisdiction to make. I conclude by asking What should the government do? I suggest the government response should include an amendment to the MACA amending Bill currently before the House declaring the Supreme Court’s judgment [2024] NZSC 164 a nullity. My reason for suggesting Parliament should speak is lack of certainty about whether a purported decision made without jurisdiction is automatically void or whether it stands until declared to be so. When the purported decision is of the highest court, only the highest court itself or Parliament may make that declaration.
