New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Interim supervision order

Legal area

Court

24 Nov 2023

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v WELLS [2023] NZHC 3356

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3356
Court

High Court

On the totality of the evidence the Court was satisfied, on a provisional basis, that Mr Wells has or has had a pervasive pattern of serious sexual offending and displays the characteristics in s107IAA (intense sexual urges toward prepubescent males, predilection, limited self-regulatory capacity and limited genuine remorse/understanding), that he is at high risk of committing a further relevant sexual offence, and therefore an interim supervision order under s107FA is justified and must be granted with standard and specified special conditions pending the ESO hearing.
6 Nov 2023

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v ROSS [2023] NZHC 3127

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3127
Court

High Court

Because the respondent had absconded and the unchallenged health assessor's report together with his criminal history satisfied, on a provisional basis, the statutory ESO risk criteria in ss107I and 107IAA, the court was entitled to and did grant an interim supervision order under s107FA with specified conditions.
18 Aug 2022

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v KEPU [2022] NZHC 2044

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2044
Court

High Court

Respondent has a pervasive pattern of serious violent offending and meets the s 107IAA criteria demonstrating a very high risk of committing a relevant violent offence; strong justification exists for an ESO; a five year Extended Supervision Order is the minimum period required for community safety; special conditions are to be set by the Parole Board; the Court lacks jurisdiction to cancel or vary an electronic monitoring interim condition imposed previously on an ISO (challenge should proceed to the Parole Board), but the Court may impose a limited interim curfew pending Board determination.
30 Jun 2022

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v NARAYAN [2022] NZHC 1535

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1535
Court

High Court

On provisional evidence (Dr Bartle's report and actuarial instruments) the respondent demonstrated a pervasive pattern of serious sexual offending and met the s107IAA criteria for a high risk of future sexual offending; the risk would be exacerbated during community reintegration and existing release conditions were insufficiently certain, therefore an Interim Supervision Order with intensive 24-hour monitoring, program attendance variation and other special conditions was necessary and proportionate to protect the public and promote rehabilitation pending determination of the ESO application.
6 Dec 2021

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v WILSON [2021] NZHC 3325 [7 December 2021]

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3325
Court

High Court

On the provisional evidence (health assessor's report and actuarial instruments) the Court was satisfied that Wilson was an eligible offender and that, on a provisional basis, he displayed a pervasive pattern of serious sexual offending and met the s107IAA thresholds (intense sexual drive, proclivity for serious sexual offending, limited self‑regulation, lack of remorse/concern for victims), such that there is a high risk of future relevant sexual offending; accordingly an ISO with IM and the specified conditions was justified to protect the community pending the substantive ESO hearing.
13 Oct 2021

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v KEPU [2021] NZHC 2745

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2745
Court

High Court

On the provisional and untested evidence available the Court was satisfied that the respondent demonstrated a pervasive pattern of serious violent offending and posed a very high risk of committing a relevant violent offence; accordingly an interim supervision order was granted pending the ESO determination and the Court imposed standard conditions (excluding the standard condition prohibiting association with persons under 16) and specified special conditions including approved residence, geographic restriction north of Warkworth, electronic monitoring, psychological assessment and treatment…
10 Sept 2021

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v GRAY [2021] NZHC 2364 [10 September 2021]

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2364
Court

High Court

On a provisional basis and having regard to respondent's pervasive violent offending history, the health assessor's report, and recent post-release allegations indicating intimate partner violence and movement during lockdown, the Court was satisfied there is a very high risk that the respondent will commit a relevant violent offence and granted an interim supervision order subject to standard s 107JA conditions and specified special conditions limited to those necessary and proportionate to mitigate risk (alcohol/drug prohibition and assessment, psychological assessment and treatment, disclo…
7 Sept 2021

ENGLAND v CORRECTIONS [2021] NZCA 443

Citation

[2021] NZCA 443
Court

Court of Appeal

Leave to adduce further evidence granted; appeal allowed because counsel failed to follow appellant's instructions and failed to obtain and present expert evidence thereby denying the appellant an effective hearing and producing a miscarriage of justice; ESO quashed, ISO reactivated, and matter remitted to the District Court for rehearing so evidence can be tested and submissions properly made; noted that jurisdiction under s107IAA(1)(d) and the basis for a 10-year term were at least arguable and required fuller exploration.
16 Jun 2021

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v TURI [2021] NZHC 1429 [16 June 2021]

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1429
Court

High Court

On a provisional basis and on the material before the Court the statutory criteria in s107IAA for a very high risk of a relevant violent offence were satisfied by a pervasive pattern of serious violent offending, evidence of intense drives and extreme volatility, limited self-regulatory capacity and lack of concern for victims; accordingly an Interim Supervision Order was necessary to mitigate risk pending the ESO hearing, but conditions must be the least restrictive necessary so electronic monitoring, regional bans and curfew were not imposed while residency, specified contact prohibitions a…
1 Apr 2021

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v TULILOA [2021] NZHC 745

Citation

[2021] NZHC 745
Court

High Court

On the evidence the Court was provisionally satisfied the ESO criteria in s107I were met (pervasive pattern of serious sexual offending and high future risk under s107IAA(1)); consequently an ISO was necessary to prevent uncontrolled release and intensive monitoring plus tailored standard and special conditions were proportionate and necessary to reduce risk and promote rehabilitation pending final ESO determination.