NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 203 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2011/0081/latest/DLM3360350.html
	
 NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF ANY COMPLAINANT UNDER THE AGE OF 18 YEARS WHO APPEARED AS A WITNESS OR NAMED WITNESS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE PROHIBITED BY S 204 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2011/0081/latest/DLM3360352.html
	
IN THE Supreme court OF new Zealand

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI	
 SC 17/2019
 [2019] NZSC 32	

	
BETWEEN	
BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON
Applicant 	
	
AND	
THE QUEEN 
Respondent	

 SC 18/2019

BETWEEN	
BRANDON JAMES ROCHE
Applicant 	
	
AND	
THE QUEEN
Respondent

Court:	
William Young, O’Regan and Ellen France JJ 	

Counsel:	
E Huda for Applicants
K L Kensington for Respondent	

Judgment:	
21 March 2019 	

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

	A	Leave to appeal is granted to the applicants (Rolleston v R [2018] NZCA 611).
	B	The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the conviction appeals.
____________________________________________________________________

REASONS
[1]	There will be an initial hearing on the appeal to determine whether or not orders should be made directing an independent practitioner to interview the jury foreperson or jury members more generally.  

Solicitors: 
Patient & Williams, Christchurch for Applicants
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent