Law of New Zealand

[4] However, in the 1877 Wi Parata v Bishop of Wellington judgment, Judge Prendergast argued that the Treaty was a "simple nullity" in terms of transferring sovereignty from Māori to the United Kingdom.

[8][9] The Treaty was incorporated in a limited way into New Zealand law by the State Owned Enterprises Act 1986.

[11] The Act was challenged in court in 1987, and the judgement of New Zealand Maori Council v Attorney-General defined the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in the context of that case and the proposed sale of government assets was found to be in breach of this proviso.

Its establishment followed the arrival in New Zealand of the first chief justice, William Martin, and it heard its first case in January 1842.

Until recent years they have played a very minor role in developing the law, and as late as 1966 it was said that they "usually follow English decisions scrupulously".

[19] In the 1980s the judiciary played a major role in redefining the constitutional position of the Treaty of Waitangi.

[21] The New Zealand legal system is heavily based on the English law, and remains similar in many respects.

Since 1969, however, a series of Acts of Parliament altered this, and New Zealand contract law is now 'largely... distinct from other jurisdictions'.

[24] The main distinction of New Zealand contract law is the wide discretionary power given to courts in granting relief.

Although these changes were initially opposed due to fears that they would make the remedy of contractual disputes unpredictable and increase levels of litigation, it is generally agreed that this has not happened, and that the laws are working satisfactorily.