27 May 2020
s46 CPA did not apply to bar the s32 charge because the two offences did not 'arise from the same facts' for double jeopardy purposes: the core punishable acts differ (excess alcohol level established by evidential test under s56 versus breach of zero-alcohol licence under s32), therefore the District Court erred in dismissing the s32 charge and that charge must be reinstated.
10 Dec 2018
Section 6 of the Sentencing Act entitled the offender to the lesser penalty under the amended regime; therefore the District Court erred in law by imposing mandatory disqualifications under s 56(4) for offences committed before 1 July 2018 where an alcohol interlock sentence applied; the alcohol interlock sentence remains mandatory, and on rehearing the discretionary disqualifications for the two s 32 zero alcohol breaches were not required given the offender's rehabilitative steps and the interlock/licence regime, so those disqualifications were quashed.