The Gazette 1974

statutes or precedents which are of binding authority,

although the fact that at no time since the Consti-

tution was enacted has compulsion been applied al-

though from time to time there have been incompleted

threats.

In conclusion, two important points must be con-

sidered. The first is that the President is subject to the

so that he cannot seize private property illegally

or imprison anyone arbitrarily even though it may not

possible for the courts to enforce their decisions

Sainst him. The President cannot break the law arbi-

trarily. But this is an entirely different situation from

hat in which a President, who is in possession of

confidential papers, refuses to disclose them even though

Grand Jury or a Court believes that it is in the public

toterest that he should do so. It must be remembered

hat this privilege is attached to the office of the

president and not to any other public officer. His is the

hnal decision and is not subject to review as is that of

he others. He may know what the public interest may

while an official may be thinking in terms of his

vn office.

Wigmore

it is said that :

The executive branch traditionally has declined to

hand over confidential files to other branches where

has been considered contrary to the public interest

to do so. Investigative files often contain hearsay

gossip, and other remote information from which the

Government hopes to develop leads. Public disclosure

of such trivia and possible falsehoods might work

grave injury and injustice to those involved."

The position of a President is far different from that

of any other public officer because an attack on him

may lead to a national disaster. It has been repeatedly

stated in the foreign press that the loss of confidence

in President Nixon's authority has been a major cause

of the financial difficulties which the United States has

suffered, especially in the exchange value of the dollar.

It has also been suggested that the sudden oil crisis is

due in part to the Arab belief that this is a favourable

time in which to bring pressure on the President. In

the circumstances the forced publication of confidential

tape recordings, some of which may be open to mis

understanding, seems to be a doubtful constitutional

innovation.

It does not follow from this that impeachment pro-

ceedings could not be brought against the President on

the ground that his refusal to hand the confidential

documents to the investigators constituted an action

which was a serious violation of his duties, but it would

be astonishing if such a proceeding would prove to

be successful, as the President's refusal would be legally

justified.

—The Times,

15 October 1973

LEGAL EDUCATION IN NEW ZEALAND

y DR.

. G. L AWSON

In the United Kingdom, legal education is effected

trough the universities and the various colleges of law.

p Practising lawyer will often have experienced both

Kinds of institution. In New Zealand, however, the

diversities provide the only source of instruction. The

Universities involved are those at Auckland, Wellington,

Ghristchurch and Otago.

Once at a university, the New Zealand student has

wo options open to him : he can either so structure his

GL.B. course as to mean that he can qualify to practise

a w

; °r he can choose a degree course giving of itself

° professional rights.

Basically, a law degree in New Zealand consists of 17

units". Once a student has, normally over four years,

chieved passes in 17 subjects he will graduate with his

f j B . Such a degree would not allow him to practise,

nowever meritorious it was. Before he becomes so privi-

ged he must, in those 17 subjects, have included certain

topics stipulated by the New Zealand Law Society,

ne body which administers the profession. Those stipu-

tod are Contract, Commercial Law, Land Law, Torts,

nninal Law, Equity and Company Law. Finally, the

would-be practitioner must pass a further six "profes-

sional subjects", making a total of 23 subjects in all.

nese professional subjects are Conveyancing, Taxation

ud Estate Planning, Ethics and Advocacy, Office Ad-

niistration, Evidence and, finally, Procedure.

I he student who graduates with these 23 subjects

hmd him not only does so with his degree but he has

so become entitled to admission to the profession as a

tou-nster

and

Solicitor of the Supreme Court of New

^aland. The existence of a fused profession, and the

atively smooth method of entry, marks a very clear

istmction from the position in England. Thus admitted,

newly-qualified practitioner pays an annual sub-

scription of (approximately) £50 per annum to his local

law society. This will be an affiliate of the New Zealand

Law Society, a body which recently celebrated its

centenary. The code of ethics which the society admin-

isters, and the Law Practitioners Act of 1955 under

which it operates, closely follow the English example.

It remains to be pointed out that a practitioner must

be a member of a firm for at least two years before he

can practise on his own. Those who wish to do so will

then practise exclusively as barristers, others as solicitors.

But which ever choice is made, each has the right of

appearance before any court in the land.

Administration

The system of judicial administration in New Zealand

will be familiar to English eyes. The court at the bottom

of the ladder is the Magistrates' Cou r t: it is placed

below the Supreme Court, which in turn is beneath the

Court of Appeal. Over all of these stands the Privy

Council. Unlike Australia, New Zealand seems dis-

inclined to abolish appeals to this last tribunal.

The magistrates' court needs explanation. Unlike the

similarly named English courts the New Zealand magis-

trates' court is presided over by a salaried stipendiary

magistrate who will have been a practitioner of seven

years' standing. It is probably true to say that this

court approximates to the English county court.

The Supreme Court is staffed by 17 Judges, one of

whom is the Chief Justice, currently Sir Richard Wild.

Normally, the Supreme Court consists of one Judge

sitting alone, but in exceptional cases a full court of

three Judges will hear the case. The writer recalls only

one such case in recent years, concerning (perhaps

inevitably) drunken driving.

The Court of Appeal, as presently constructed, dates