AREAS OF EXPERTISE
Civil and Commercial Litigation, Public and Administrative Law, Criminal Law
Tiho is a barrister with experience in both civil litigation and criminal law. He regularly appears in courts and tribunals around New Zealand.
Before joining chambers, Tiho was a judge’s clerk at the Court of Appeal, where he gained wide experience in civil and criminal law including in respect of pre-trial, conviction and sentence appeals, judicial review of administrative action, company disputes, environmental cases and regulatory and disciplinary matters.
Tiho has appeared in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, High Court, and District Court. He has also appeared in various specialist tribunals and hearings including Parliamentary select committees, inquiries and inquests, medical disciplinary matters, local authority hearings, alcohol licensing and personal injury disputes. He has acted for and against individuals, groups and associations, insurers, companies and local and central government bodies.
Tiho can be instructed directly (where permitted) or by a solicitor. He accepts instructions to assist senior counsel.
- Bachelor of Laws with Honours (First Class), University of Otago (2013).
- First in class in seven subjects: Advanced Public Law, Criminal Law, Jurisprudence, Energy Law, Law & Emerging Technologies, Law and Society, and Legal Theory.
- Admitted as a Barrister and Solicitor (2014).
- Panel Prosecutor, Kayes Fletcher Walker, Manukau Crown Solicitor (2019-).
- Council Member, New Zealand Bar Association (2016-present).
- Committee Member, New Zealand Law Society ACC Law Reform Committee (2015-present).
- Member, Resource Management Lawyers’ Association (2017-present).
- Barrister, Stout Street Chambers (February 2016-present).
- Judge’s Clerk, Court of Appeal (2014-2016).
- Lecturer and Tutor, Victoria University of Wellington (2015-2018) and University of Otago (2012-2013).
- Summer Clerk, Russell McVeagh, Auckland (summer 2012-2013).
Supreme Court and Court of Appeal
- Re Solicitor-General's Reference (No 1 and 2 of 2020)  NZCA 563 (Court of Appeal): counsel assisting the Court in respect of challenges to validity of several drink-driving convictions; whether Police references in "Block J" wording to "prosecution" instead of conviction" or "infringement offence" complied or reasonably complied with the requirements of the Land Transport Act 1998.
- Croser v Focus Genetics LP  NZCA 367 (Court of Appeal): successful appeal against High Court decision, overturning entry of defendant's summary judgment, regarding whether the parties are bound by a settlement reached in correspondence in leadup to trial.
- Smith v New Zealand Kennel Club Inc  NZCA 454 (Court of Appeal): counsel for Kennel Club successfully defending judicial review challenge to registration and naming decisions of pedigree dogs.
- New Health New Zealand Inc v South Taranaki District Council and Attorney-General  NZSC 59 and  NZSC 60 (Supreme Court): counsel for appellant challenging Council’s power to fluoridate water supply, arguments about legislative authority, breach of New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, and public law challenges under Medicines Act and promulgation of Regulations.
- Re Solicitor-General’s Reference (No 1 of 2016)  NZSC 58,  1 NZLR 147 (Supreme Court) and  NZCA 417,  2 NZLR 1 (Court of Appeal): counsel assisting the Court; Solicitor-General’s Reference under the Criminal Procedure Act 2011; disqualified drivers’ challenge to validity of demerit points system of information transfer between Police and New Zealand Transport Agency.
- Fahey v R  NZCA 596,  2 NZLR 392 (Court of Appeal): counsel (written submissions) for New Zealand Bar Association and New Zealand Law Society as interveners in this criminal appeal; review of trial judges’ uses of amicus curiae in an expanded role in a criminal trial.
- Borrowdale v Director-General of Health  NZHC 2090 (Full Bench, High Court): counsel for applicant, challenging lawfulness of COVID-19 lockdown measures, Court declaring that "By various public and widely publicised announcements made between 26 March and 3 April 2020 in response to the COVID-19 public health crisis, members of the executive branch of the New Zealand Government stated or implied that, for that nine-day period, subject to limited exceptions, all New Zealanders were required by law to stay at home and in their "bubbles" when there was no such requirement. Those announcements had the effect of limiting certain rights and freedoms affirmed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 including, in particular, the rights to freedom of movement, peaceful assembly and association. While there is no question that the requirement was a necessary, reasonable and proportionate response to the COVID-19 crisis at that time, the requirement was not prescribed by law and was therefore contrary to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act."
- Mailo v Police  NZHC 3164 (High Court): counsel for Police opposing appeal against refusal to grant discharge without conviction including on travel and cultural grounds.
- Homes v ACC  NZHC 3034 (High Court): counsel for appellant; appeal allowed by consent and remitted for rehearing, on grounds that the Court applied a predecessor legislative provision and failed to give adequate reasons for its decision.
- A and B v Coroner's Court at Auckland  NZHC 2278 (High Court): counsel for B, successfully overturned Coroner's decision declining name suppression to medical professional in respect of a second inquest into the death of a young adult.
- New Conservative and Baker v Television New Zealand Ltd  NZHC 2650 and  NZHC 3096 (High Court): counsel for applicant party contesting general election, seeking urgent interim orders requiring invitation to participate in televised minor parties' debate.
- Johnson, Wale and Williams as trustees of Abel Trust v Johnson and others  NZHC 1563 (High Court): counsel for defendant director successfully opposing fellow director’s application for leave to bring a cross-claim by way of derivative action under s 165 Companies Act 1993 and setting aside previous consent orders.
- Bartle Group Ltd v NZTA and Police  NZHC 35 and  NZHC 1828 (High Court): counsel for Police as intervener in respect of application by heavy haulage operator for a declaration as to the meaning of the Land Transport Rule: Vehicle Dimensions and Mass 2016.
- Body Corporate 420508 (High Court): counsel for successful application for extinguishment of easements in respect of a community development.
- Ahuja v New Zealand Police  NZHC 2010 (High Court): counsel for Police in an appeal by a driver against conviction based on whether Police sufficiently facilitated the driver’s right to a lawyer in the drink driving context.
- Spencer v Bryner  NZHC 1762 (High Court): counsel for defendant property vendor seeking formal proof against first third party (vendor’s firm of solicitors).
- King v Accident Compensation Corporation  NZHC 1751 (High Court): counsel for plaintiff, judicial review challenge alleging ACC failure to take into account mandatory relevant considerations or legislative pre-requisites to decision, in declining to fund a mobile hoist for a mechanic.
- Croser v Focus Genetics LP: counsel for South Australian sheep farmers in litigation against defendant including obtaining without notice interim injunction for genetic data for mating () NZHC 627 (High Court)); obtaining further interim relief in respect of genetic data () NZHC 2995 (High Court)); and in respect of defendant's applications for leave to appeal and stay () NZHC 3087;  HZHC 3133 (High Court); and  NZCA 639 (Court of Appeal)).
- Research and Education Advanced Network of New Zealand Ltd v Commerce Commission  NZHC 2724 (High Court): counsel for Commerce Commission on an appeal under the Telecommunications Act 2001 in respect of the Telecommunications Development Levy.
- M v Accident Compensation Corporation  NZHC 1919 (High Court): counsel for applicant seeking leave to appeal against ACC’s decision declining cover for surgical mesh injury.
- Service Painting and Building Co Pty Ltd v Pacific International Hotel Management School Ltd  NZHC 850 (High Court): counsel for plaintiff, successfully obtained summary judgment on a painting contract.
- Trustpower Ltd v Electricity Authority and Meridian Energy Ltd  NZHC 2914,  2 NZLR 253 (High Court): counsel for second respondent, successfully defending judicial review of regulator’s consultation process in electricity sector.
District Court and Tribunals
- Lester v Electoral Officer and Foster  NZDC 22157 (District Court); counsel for Mayor-elect as intervener successfully opposing an application for a manual recount of local electoral results.
- Rongotai Investments Ltd v Wellington City Council (Land Valuation Tribunal): counsel in respect of rating objections and related interlocutory matters including recusal, admissibility of evidence and referring questions to High Court ( NZLVT 110 and  NZLVT 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11 and see  NZHC 543).
- Counsel for prosecuting agencies including Official Assignee and Customs, and counsel for Crown including in respect of bail applications, pre-trial matters, jury trial and sentencing appearances.
- Counsel for defendant director and company in Building Act prosecution for unconsented building works.
- Counsel for liquor licence holder regarding suspension and cancellation of on-licence under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.
- Counsel for injured claimants in personal injury (ACC) disputes at review and on appeal, and related applications for leave and special leave.
- Counsel for medical practitioners in disciplinary proceedings and Coronial inquiries and inquests.