Hawkins v Sturt - [1992] 3 NZLR 602

Evidence — Privilege of spouse — Whether Serious Fraud Office Act 1990 overrides spousal immunity — Whether spouse had "lawful justification or excuse" to refuse or fail to attend before director and answer questions — Whether "lawful justification or excuse" might arise under Serious Fraud Office Act — Whether spouse could be compelled to make disclosure of communications within the marriage — Whether notice to attend and answer questions amounted to "cruel" treatment under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act — Serious Fraud Office Act 1990, ss 9(1), 23, 27, 28, 38 and 45(d) - Evidence Act 1908, ss 4 and 6 - Evidence Amendment Act (No 2) 1980, s 29 - New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 9.