LegalResearchFoundation

Given the absence of a civil damages action for personal injury, the Health and Disability Commissioner's (HDC) complaints process occupies a pivotal role in New Zealand's medico-legal regulatory arrangements. It is designed to address complainants' non-financial motivations in making a complaint after an adverse event in their health care. This article asks whether the HDC complaints process accords its users, particularly complainants and consumers, acceptable and effective legal mechanisms for asserting their legal rights and securing just outcomes. The process is assessed against the original statutory aims of the complaints process ("fair, simple, speedy, and efficient resolution of complaints").¹ Quantitative and qualitative evidence is marshalled in support of the conclusion that unacceptable barriers to accessing justice are embedded in the complaints process, as currently designed and operationalised. Of particular note are the lack of any means for a complainant to seek review of the merits of a Commissioner's decision to take no further action on a complaint, and for either party to challenge the outcome of an HDC investigation. Four reform options are considered. The author's preference is the inclusion of a mechanism for external review or appeal of adverse HDC decisions.

This article offers a critique of the Intelligence and Security Act 2017. It demonstrates that three underlying contextual factors — formal reviews, domestic scandals and international terrorism — each informed the pertinent law reform process in differing ways. The article also identifies several features of this new Act which deliberately strengthen New Zealand's surveillance capability before focusing on an array of deceptive, highly intrusive and covert surveillance practices that this Act makes lawful. The article finds that this new law transforms the intelligence community into the "eyes and ears" of an apparatus of control focused less on protecting New Zealanders from harms emanating abroad and more on managing the country's population at home. Given New Zealand's limited ability to make sense of its prevailing security environment from a whole-of-society perspective, the Intelligence and Security Act 2017 warrants closer scrutiny from experts in security and law as well as members of the general public.

This article reports key findings of a longitudinal exploratory study of a self-selected cohort of law students across three New Zealand law schools. Data was collected from the students across a four-year period during which the students were persisting with their law studies. Reported findings include students' motivation and values associated with the study of law, their academic engagement and outcomes, and their relationships with teachers and other students. Findings are considered in the light of themes emerging from the higher education literature on student engagement. Although students generally reported high levels of academic competence, other findings revealed some room for improvement in students' learning experiences. Overall findings were, however, consistent with those reported in other empirical studies of New Zealand university student experiences. The article concludes with some general recommendations as to how New Zealand law schools might act on the findings to improve students' law school experience.