What does the Courts Remote Participation Bill do?

The Courts Remote Participation Bill will repeal and replace the Courts (Remote Participation) Act 2010 with a new high-level enabling framework that supports wider use of remote participation in court proceedings, with the detail set out in Court Rules.[S1]

When was the Courts Remote Participation Bill introduced?

The Courts Remote Participation Bill was introduced to Parliament on 30 June 2026, following a Cabinet decision on 1 September 2025 to replace the existing Courts (Remote Participation) Act 2010.[S1]

How will the new framework affect criminal, civil, family and commercial hearings?

The new framework is designed to enable more hearings to be conducted remotely across criminal, civil, family and commercial jurisdictions, with Court Rules specifying which events are remote and which remain in person, and with judicial officers retaining control to ensure fairness and access to justice.[S1]

Courts Remote Participation Bill introduced to expand remote hearings

On 30 June 2026, the Government introduced the Courts Remote Participation Bill, a new enabling framework to replace the 2010 Act and expand remote appearances in criminal, civil, family and commercial proceedings.

A new framework for remote participation across New Zealand courts[S1]

On 30 June 2026 the Government introduced the Courts Remote Participation Bill, which will repeal and replace the Courts (Remote Participation) Act 2010 with a new enabling framework for remote appearances in court proceedings.[S1]

This development continues a deliberate policy shift towards greater use of technology in the courts to support access to justice, efficiency and flexibility in how hearings are conducted.[S1]

Policy background: from incremental change to comprehensive reform[S1]

The Courts (Remote Participation) Act 2010 (CRPA) currently provides the legislative framework for using audio‑visual and audio links in judicial proceedings throughout Aotearoa New Zealand.[S1]

Over time, the Act has been amended – most recently by the Courts (Remote Participation) Amendment Act 2024, which introduced a presumption that victims may observe criminal trials and sentencings remotely where statutory criteria are met and authorised the use of audio links in appropriate criminal, civil and family proceedings.[S1]

On 1 September 2025, Cabinet agreed that the 2010 Act should be repealed and replaced with a new legislative framework to enable more remote participation.[S1]

The Ministry of Justice has described the reform as moving to a “high‑level enabling law” supported by detailed Court Rules that will set out which court events occur remotely and which remain in‑person.[S1]

The introduction of the Courts Remote Participation Bill to Parliament on 30 June 2026 gives legislative form to that Cabinet decision, signalling a shift from incremental amendments to a more comprehensive redesign of the statutory architecture for remote hearings.[S1]

Core features: an enabling Act backed by Court Rules[S1]

While the detail of the Bill sits in the Bill itself and future Court Rules, the Ministry of Justice’s policy material frames the reform in clear terms:[S1]

The 2010 Act will be repealed and replaced by a new Courts Remote Participation Act.[S1]
The new Act will be a high‑level enabling statute, rather than a prescriptive code for when and how remote participation must occur.[S1]
Court Rules will become the primary instrument for specifying which hearings can or must be conducted remotely, and which are required to be in person.[S1]

This design is significant for practitioners.

The prescriptive criteria and presumptions in the current CRPA – for example around criminal procedural matters and defendant participation – will likely give way to a framework in which the type of event (case management conference, callover, submissions‑only hearing, substantive trial) and court tier are dealt with in rules that can be updated more readily than primary legislation.[S1]

Implications for criminal practice[S1]

The criminal jurisdiction has already seen increased use of remote technology, particularly for defendants in custody and for witnesses whose location or vulnerability makes remote participation appropriate.[S1]

The 2024 Amendment Act further confirmed that victims and their support people may observe trials and sentencings remotely if suitable technology is available and judicial directions permit.[S1]

The new Bill’s enabling structure is likely to have several practical consequences for criminal practitioners:[S1]

Expanded remote case management: routine procedural events, including callovers and case review hearings, are likely to be routinely listed for remote participation where suitable technology is available, aligning with the Government’s objective of enabling more virtual participation.[S1]

Refined rules on defendant appearances: while the existing framework emphasises defendants’ consent for remote appearances in trials determining guilt, future Court Rules may more clearly differentiate between substantive trial events, sentencing, and ancillary applications, with remote options calibrated to fairness, open justice and courtroom security interests.[S1]

Victims’ remote participation embedded in rules: the presumption introduced in 2024 that victims may observe criminal trials and sentencing remotely – subject to judicial control and technological capacity – will be carried through into the new regime and operationalised by Court Rules.[S1]

Criminal advocates will need to adjust their case preparation and advocacy style for hearings where clients, witnesses and victims are not physically present in the courtroom, including reconsidering how to confer with clients during remote appearances and how best to present oral submissions to a judge or bench on screen.[S1]

Civil, family and commercial hearings: remote by design, not exception[S1]

Civil, family and commercial practitioners have already experienced widespread remote participation, particularly during and after the COVID‑19 response, under a combination of CRPA powers, practice directions and judicial protocols.[S1]

The Ministry of Justice’s review recognises that remote technologies are now a routine part of court operations.[S1]

Under the new Bill’s framework:

Civil and commercial case management events can be structured with a default expectation of remote participation where appropriate, with Court Rules setting the baseline and allowing judicial officers to depart where fairness or complexity demands an in‑person hearing.[S1]

Family Court events involving vulnerable participants may be managed to balance safety, participation and procedural fairness, with remote options used both to minimise travel and to reduce stress where appearing physically in court would be difficult.[S1]

Specialist and appellate jurisdictions will be able to refine their own remote participation protocols consistently with the enabling Act, guided by the judiciary’s existing work on ensuring court technologies support access to justice.[S1]

For commercial litigators in particular, the Bill is likely to cement the practice of remote interlocutory hearings and some submissions‑only appeals, allowing parties and counsel to appear from multiple locations and potentially reducing the cost of travel and waiting time.[S1]

Advocacy, etiquette and case management in a remote‑first environment[S1]

The Ministry of Justice’s operational guidance on remote hearings already emphasises that a remote court hearing is still a formal court sitting, with the same obligations as an in‑person hearing.[S1]

Guidance for participants stresses that attendees must follow judicial directions, dress as they would for court, avoid recording any part of the hearing and not publish material while proceedings are in progress.[S1]

As remote hearings become more embedded through the new Bill:

Advocacy practice will continue to evolve.

Counsel will need to ensure they can effectively read the courtroom, manage documents, and respond to judicial interventions through audio‑visual platforms.

The design of Court Rules will be critical in providing clarity around how exhibits, authorities and affidavits are handled in remote hearings.[S1]

Case management strategies may change.

With more procedural events held remotely, timetabling, witness availability and pre‑trial conferencing can be handled with greater flexibility, but counsel will need to manage technological reliability and client engagement.[S1]

Ethical and confidentiality considerations will intensify.

Existing prohibitions on recording or sharing remote hearing content underscore the need for practitioners to brief clients carefully about their obligations when attending remotely and to ensure secure environments for confidential communications during and surrounding hearings.[S1]

Judicial control and access to justice[S1]

A recurring theme in the Ministry of Justice’s review and in judicial commentary is that remote participation is a tool, not an end in itself.[S1]

The enabling framework is intended to support access to justice by making it easier for participants to attend court, particularly where distance, cost or personal circumstances would otherwise be barriers.[S1]

At the same time, the courts retain judicial control over how proceedings are conducted.

The existing presumption for victim observation, for example, expressly preserves judicial flexibility to ensure compliance with closed court orders, name suppression and fair trial requirements.[S1]

The new Bill’s reliance on Court Rules will allow each jurisdiction to tailor remote participation in ways that reflect its caseload, participants’ needs and constitutional role.[S1]

For judges and court administrators, the Bill will sit alongside ongoing work to ensure that court technologies – including virtual meeting rooms and platforms such as Teams – are robust, secure and designed around the needs of court users.[S1]

What practitioners should watch next[S1]

With the Courts Remote Participation Bill now before Parliament, practitioners should monitor:

The select committee process, including any call for submissions on how remote participation should be structured across different jurisdictions.[S1]
The draft Court Rules that will give operational effect to the enabling Act, including default positions for common types of hearings and criteria for judicial departures.[S1]
Any updated judicial practice directions and protocols on remote participation, which will continue to play a central role in day‑to‑day case management.[S1]

Taken together, the Bill and its supporting rules are poised to reshape how criminal, civil, family and commercial hearings are prepared and conducted, embedding remote participation as a standard feature of the New Zealand court system rather than an exception used only in limited circumstances.[S1]