Litigants in person (LiPs) receive the message that emotion should be “left out” of New Zealand courtrooms. This is a confusing and impossible goal. This paper draws on two empirical studies and argues that the exhortation to leave emotion out is multi-layered, referring to behaving and thinking like a lawyer, including a focus on the commercial or transactional elements of disputes, rather than on other aspects that are important to litigants. This is often not possible for LiPs and it can reduce their sense of procedural justice and result in the omission of legally relevant material. Judges can respond to LiPs who violate the emotion regime by allowing LiPs to explain aspects of the dispute that are salient to them. We need to consider how the civil courts can allow more space for litigants to tell stories, rather than focusing only on the commercial or transactional aspects of disputes. Los litigantes autorrepresentados de Nueva Zelanda reciben el mensaje de que las emociones deben “quedarse fuera” del juzgado. Se trata de un objetivo imposible de lograr. Utilizando material de dos estudios empíricos, este artículo argumenta que la exhortación a desprenderse de las emociones tiene muchas capas, referidas a comportarse y pensar como un abogado, incluyendo la atención dada a los elementos comerciales o transaccionales de una disputa más que a otros aspectos importantes para los litigantes. Las partes que se representan a sí mismas no pueden cumplir ese mandato, y su sentido de justicia procedimental puede verse reducida y resultar en la omisión de material jurídicamente relevante. Los jueces pueden permitir a los autorrepresentados explicar aspectos de la disputa que les parecen destacables. Debemos considerar cómo los juzgados de lo civil pueden dejar que los litigantes cuenten historias en lugar de centrarse sólo en los aspectos comerciales o transaccionales.

No abstract

No abstract

This paper reflects on the influences and outcomes of He Kāinga Oranga/Housing and Health Research Programme over 25 years, and their impact on housing and health policy in Aotearoa and internationally. Working in partnership particularly with Māori and Pasifika communities, we have conducted randomised control trials which have shown the health and broad co-benefits of retrofitted insulation, heating and remediation of home hazards, which have underpinned government policy in the Warm Up NZ-Heat Smart programme and the Healthy Homes Standards for rental housing. These trials have been included as evidence in the WHO Housing and Health Guidelines and led to our designation as a WHO Collaborating Centre on Housing and Wellbeing. We are increasingly explicitly weaving Māori frameworks, values and processes with traditional Western science.

No abstract