Stare decisis. R v Chilton [2006] 2 NZLR 341 (CA)
New Zealand judgments, in context.
Search High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court judgments. Find why a case was cited and how later courts treated it.
For New Zealand litigators and barristers
Research New Zealand law in Claude and ChatGPT.
Claude
ChatGPT
Library
Trace a case’s citation history. See how later courts treated it. Read the judgments to understand why.
NZ$59 / month NZ$590 / year
- 550,000+citations from NZ judgments
- Each classified by how the later court treated the authority.
- 150,000+full judgments
- NZ and England & Wales judgments.
- 55,000+ versionsof 28,000+ Acts and regulations
- Read an Act as it stood when the events in your dispute happened.
- 500,000+legal propositions
- Legal principles and tests, linked to their source judgments.
From instructions
to submissions.
Follow a proceeding stage by stage. Each example replays an assistant connected to Res Ipsa: the research, counsel’s decision and the draft. Pause anytime and open the authorities it cites.
Choose a stage, then an example to play the session.
The examples could not load. Reload the page to try again.
Fictional matters prepared for demonstration. Not legal advice. Authorities and outputs must be verified by a qualified lawyer before use.
See how later courts
treated a decision.
Choose an example from your practice area, then open the judgments.
Criminal
01 / 05Sentencing · Guilty pleas
Hessell v R
[2009] NZCA 450 · Court of Appeal
A change on appeal. The citation record points to the Supreme Court judgment. Read it to assess what remains of the earlier approach.
Commercial
02 / 05Contractual interpretation
Bathurst Resources Ltd v L&M Coal Holdings Ltd
[2021] NZSC 85 · Supreme Court
Distinguished in a later case. The record links Bathurst to Ecomi. Follow the later reasoning to assess the distinction and its relevance to your dispute.
The next judgment to read
Ecomi Technology Pte Ltd v MB Technology Ltd[2024] NZCA 47 · Court of Appeal
Family & trusts
03 / 05Trust powers · Relationship property
Clayton v Clayton (Vaughan Road Property Trust)
[2016] NZSC 29 · Supreme Court
A later distinction to examine. The citation record identifies Da Silva as distinguishing Clayton. Read the judgments together to assess the reach of the earlier authority.
Employment
04 / 05Employment Relations Authority jurisdiction
FMV v TZB
[2021] NZSC 102 · Supreme Court
Applied in a later decision. Follow the jurisdiction test from the Supreme Court to its application in Foster v Wilson.
Environment
05 / 05Planning policies · Resource consents
Environmental Defence Society v NZ King Salmon
[2014] NZSC 38 · Supreme Court
A distinction in subsequent treatment. The record points to R J Davidson Family Trust. Read the later judgment to consider how King Salmon bears on your planning question.
The next judgment to read
R J Davidson Family Trust v Marlborough District Council[2018] NZCA 316 · Court of Appeal
The law behind
your argument.
Search New Zealand cases. Consider English authority. Check the legislation that applied at the time.
Persuasive, not binding. Club Securities Ltd v Hurley
Find persuasive authority from England & Wales.
Search England & Wales judgments for persuasive comparative authority in your New Zealand research.
Lex prospicit, non respicit. Legislation Act 2019, s 12
Legislation as at any date
Read an Act as it stood when the events in your dispute happened.
Questions lawyers ask.
Does Res Ipsa have its own chat assistant?
No. Res Ipsa is a research database, not a chatbot. Connect it to Claude or ChatGPT and ask your questions there. Your assistant searches our New Zealand judgments, citation history and legislation, and links its answer to the judgments it relies on.
You can also search cases and read judgments directly in the Res Ipsa Library, without an assistant. The connection guide shows how to set up Claude or ChatGPT.
How does Res Ipsa help me note up a case?
Find later decisions that applied, followed, considered, distinguished, doubted, did not follow or overruled the case. Read those judgments to check the reasoning.
Can I research older and unreported decisions?
Often. We can show how later judgments in our database cited an older or unreported case, even when we do not hold its judgment.
Can I rely on the treatment signals?
A treatment signal is a research lead, not a ruling. Open the linked judgment to check the court’s reasoning.
Neutral mentions are classified too. A case being cited does not, by itself, mean the later court endorsed it.
Is my research confidential?
We receive the searches and other inputs your assistant sends to Res Ipsa. We do not have access to your conversation history. Those inputs can still contain details from your conversation. Search text is processed in real time, including by our embedding provider, Voyage AI; it is not saved in search history or usage logs. Voyage AI deletes the search text after processing and does not use it to train models.
Usage logs record the account, tool, time, outcome, result count and response time. Your AI provider handles your conversation under its own terms. See our Privacy Policy for how we process and retain information.
Research where you work.
Start 14-day free trial
14 days free. Payment method required. Your selected paid subscription starts when the trial ends unless you cancel. Any applicable taxes are shown at checkout.
Your AI assistant’s subscription, if required, is separate.