We live in a world in which smartphones can track our steps and location, sense light, temperature, and our voice. If cell phone privacy even exists, does a law requiring us to provide access to our cell phones cross the line?
Jeremy Johnson contributes to an article on The Arbitration Amendment Bill 2017 for LawTalk Magazine.
When a court makes an order, the party or parties against whom those orders are made may well query what will happen if they do not comply with those orders. The recent decision of Palmer J in Zhang v King David Investments Ltd (in Liq)  NZHC 3018 provides an example of the adverse consequences which can occur.
On 26 October 2016, the Supreme Court released its decision in Marwood v Commissioner of Police  NZSC 139. This decision required the Court to determine whether New Zealand courts have jurisdiction to exclude improperly obtained evidence in civil proceedings and, if so, whether the jurisdiction should be exercised on the facts of the case before it.