New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Dismissal from service

Legal area

Court

19 Oct 2021

BOYD v R [2021] NZHC 2797

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2797
Court

High Court

No s 122 warning was required on the facts; the Judge's summing up adequately and fairly addressed credibility, reliability and propensity issues; no miscarriage of justice arose and the convictions stand; the sentence of severe reprimand and dismissal was not manifestly inadequate in the military context given the seriousness, breach of trust, rehabilitative considerations and the strong denunciatory/deterrent effect of dismissal following a public Court Martial.
15 Jun 2021

STEWART v R [2021] NZHC 1404

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1404
Court

High Court

The Court allowed the appeal: the 12‑month imprisonment starting point adopted by the Court Martial was within range but the sentencing court failed to properly account for the causal nexus between the appellant's untreated service‑related PTSD (and resultant alcohol dependence) and his reduced culpability and prospects for rehabilitation; dismissal was not tolerable or necessary in the circumstances; applying adjusted discounts (PTSD/alcohol causation, remorse, good character and guilty plea) produced an end sentence of four months detention and retention in service, and the compensatory pay…
10 Dec 2015

WILLS v R [2015] NZCA 598

Citation

[2015] NZCA 598
Court

Court of Appeal

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the proposed appeal had no real prospect of success: even accepting the narrower factual challenge on demotion, the primary basis for dismissal — repeated deception of vulnerable subordinates that undermines the Defence Force ethos and makes retention intolerable — stood and meant the interests of justice did not justify extending time for a further appeal.
4 May 2015

WILLS v THE QUEEN [2015] NZHC 913

Citation

[2015] NZHC 913
Court

High Court

Although the Court Martial departed from the preferred sequence by determining dismissal before fully assessing personal mitigating factors, that procedural error was not outcome-determinative because the appellate court found dismissal inevitable: repeated, premeditated deception of vulnerable subordinate personnel and betrayal of a mentorship relationship made retention intolerable and dismissal proportionate; fresh psychiatric evidence was admitted but did not alter that conclusion.
30 Apr 2015

MANNING v THE QUEEN [2015] NZHC 936

Citation

[2015] NZHC 936
Court

High Court

The Court quashed the 15 month imprisonment sentence because the Court Martial materially erred by failing to consider comparable cases and by underweighting the appellant's prior exemplary service; the appropriate sentence was a starting point of six months detention reduced for guilty plea, previous good service and time already served, producing an effective three month detention followed by dismissal from service.
30 Apr 2015

MANNING v R [2015] NZHC 882

Citation

[2015] NZHC 882
Court

High Court

The Court allowed the appeal and substituted the Court Martial's sentence with a sentence of three months' detention, to be followed by dismissal from Her Majesty's Service, concluding the substituted sentence was the appropriate disciplinary response.

New Zealand Case Law

BOYD v R [2021] NZHC 2797

STEWART v R [2021] NZHC 1404

WILLS v R [2015] NZCA 598

WILLS v THE QUEEN [2015] NZHC 913

MANNING v THE QUEEN [2015] NZHC 936

MANNING v R [2015] NZHC 882