1 Nov 2023
On the papers and oral submissions the defendant demonstrated no defence and no valid basis for adjournment; consequently summary judgment was granted ordering vacant possession within 25 working days and costs to the plaintiff on a 2B basis.
18 Aug 2021
The High Court found no error in the District Court's sentencing exercise: the 16‑month starting point was generous, the admitted mitigating matters would not materially reduce the sentence given the seriousness, multiplicity and context of the offending and the offender's history, and accordingly the 13‑month sentence was properly upheld.
8 Jul 2021
Leave to appeal was granted because the Court was satisfied there was a real risk of a miscarriage of justice unless the appeal proceeded: the District Court and High Court had not fully appreciated the extent and nature of the appellant's rehabilitation, the legitimate reasons for her failures to appear, and the proper assessment of gravity where long‑term addiction is a causative factor, raising issues of sufficient gravity to merit appellate consideration.
7 Dec 2020
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant repeatedly failed to appear without a proper explanation or supporting medical evidence, the Court had been indulgent in granting prior adjournments, and the prolonged detention of the dog in unsuitable pound conditions created an animal welfare concern making dismissal appropriate.
20 Aug 2020
Leave to bring the appeal out of time was granted; the Court found aspects of the District Court's cumulative starting points excessive and that the sentencing Judge had not recorded a totality analysis so the High Court re-evaluated starting points and applied totality. The Court substituted a reduced aggregate sentence totalling 12 months' imprisonment allocated across the offences (drugs, theft re-sentencing, breach of supervision, failure to appear), and held that an uplift for old historical convictions was not warranted.
4 Dec 2019
The High Court held the District Court did not err: the starting point and total sentence were within the permissible range for this level of commercial cannabis offending, the Judge reasonably assessed role and mitigation, the uplift for failing to appear and offending while on home detention was somewhat high but not sufficient to make the overall sentence manifestly excessive, and available evidence did not establish addiction as the primary driver of the offending; therefore the appeal was dismissed and sentence upheld.
18 Jun 2019
The High Court held the District Court correctly applied s122: the appellant gave no credible reasonable excuse for non-appearance, the interests of justice (including delay, police readiness and minor nature of the offence) supported proceeding in absence, the Māori sovereignty challenge is not justiciable, and no miscarriage of justice occurred; appeal dismissed.
12 Sept 2018
The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to appear at the allocated hearing despite a prior minute indicating the matter would not proceed on the papers; accordingly the Court dismissed the application and awarded costs to the NZLS on a 2B basis.
26 Jul 2018
Because the debtor failed to advance the matter after an adjournment, did not obtain advice within a reasonable time due to asserted personal circumstances, and there had been prior consideration and rejection of a proposal, the Court declined to revisit the adjudication and the bankruptcy order made in the debtor's absence was upheld.
1 Mar 2018
The High Court held the District Court judge erred by relying on the ‘usual basis’ halving conversion to reject home detention as producing a sentence too short for rehabilitation; the judge should have exercised his discretion to tailor a home detention term to meet sentencing purposes. The initial four months' imprisonment was quashed and replaced with three months' home detention with standard post-release and the special conditions imposed by the District Court; the nine-month driving disqualification was affirmed.