Unlock this article and all PREMIUM content by subscribing to LawNews
Already a subscriber?
Is ‘cultural fit’ more important than great grades when hiring lawyers?
Rule of law – but for whom? A rejoinder to the NZLS report
June 30, 2025
Roger Partridge
Opinion pieces published by LawNews
LawNews welcomes opinion and commentary pieces from all sides of the political and social spectrum. LawNews supports the right of individuals to hold and express different opinions and will publish a wide range of views to consider and enjoy. These pieces are not the opinion of LawNews or The Law Association of New Zealand; they represent the views of the individual writers who submit commentary pieces for publication.
Individual opinion pieces are not news stories so there is no ethical requirement for them to be balanced with contrasting or opposite opinions at the time of publication. Should you disagree with something you have read, we encourage you to add to the debate by submitting your own opinion for publication on the LawNews website.
Latest Articles
The real reason why New Zealand politics is stuck
District Court judges appointed
Sex-offender teacher prompts Clean Slate Act changes
An inscrutable witness: exploring the admissibility of AI-derived evidence in the R v Popper mock trial
No results found.
Sign in below or
become a Member
to join the discussion.
Commenting Guidelines
Join the conversation by adding your comments to this story. Comments on this site are moderated before publication to encourage respectful and civil debate. By submitting your comment, you agree to our commenting rules available here.
4 Comments
Submit a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Related Content
Sick of your job and New Zealand’s very average weather? The Cook Islands may have a deal for you
Is ‘cultural fit’ more important than great grades when hiring lawyers?
The real reason why New Zealand politics is stuck
District Court judges appointed
No results found.
Thank you Mr Partridge. I regret that the NZLS is part of the problem.
Thank you, Roger – a well written, and well-reasoned article. And absolutely correct.
The question revolves around interpretation of statute and the development of the common law. The courts must always have the last say on the common law.
I comment on the proposal that parliament define the rule of law, in its ‘thin’ version.
Even accepting we use something like Lon Fuller’s formal rule of law, the rule of law has international reach – its content has been formulated by judges not legislatures. There will continue to be clashing approaches across jurisdictions. You may answer that’s okay as long as NZ gets its ‘thin’ version- but that too may not survive future judicial interference or legislative reform.
Even the thin doctrine of the rule of law is not emblazoned on tablets of stone.
While an ever expansive vision of the rule of law will ultimately bend the doctrine out of shape, there is room for some substantive content. At the moment this content is in the minds of jurists who only ever deal with aspects of the rule of law, arising in a given context, never the whole doctrine. I can’t see a way out of that in our current Westminster system.