New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Proportionality of consequences

Legal area

Court

3 Mar 2023

PRAKASH v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2023] NZHC 391

Citation

[2023] NZHC 391
Court

High Court

The High Court upheld the District Court: applicant failed to establish a real and appreciable risk that the identified employment and travel/migration consequences would occur and there was insufficient evidence that those consequences would be out of all proportion to the gravity of the offending; regulators are entitled to know convictions, and the District Court did not err in refusing a discharge without conviction, so the appeal is dismissed.
17 Mar 2022

R v B (CA697/2021) [2022] NZCA 62

Citation

[2022] NZCA 62
Court

Court of Appeal

The District Court judge misapplied youth justice principles so as to displace the statutory proportionality test in s 107 Sentencing Act; the consequences of conviction identified were ordinary and not out of all proportion to the extremely serious multiple rapes of a child, so discharge without conviction was not available; appeal allowed, conviction entered and matter remitted for sentencing.
7 Dec 2020

SMITH v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2020] NZHC 3211

Citation

[2020] NZHC 3211
Court

High Court

The Court found the offending overall to be of low gravity when mitigation (no prior convictions, voluntary anger management course, completion of community work, remorse and low risk of reoffending) was taken into account; the conviction had caused and risked substantial immigration and employment disadvantages which are out of all proportion to the low gravity of the offence; accordingly the conviction was quashed and the appellant discharged without conviction under s106.
21 May 2020

R v CHAND [2020] NZHC 1081

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1081
Court

High Court

The application for discharge without conviction was declined because the court assessed both the gravity of the offending and the likely consequences of conviction as low, and therefore the consequences of conviction were not out of all proportion to the gravity of the offending and statutory threshold under s107 was not met.
14 Feb 2020

NORTHOVER v POLICE [2020] NZHC 167

Citation

[2020] NZHC 167
Court

High Court

The District Court materially undervalued the cumulative mitigating factors (age, exemplary character, clear remorse, substantial rehabilitative steps and deep cultural impact) when assessing the overall gravity of the offending; those errors led to the conclusion that consequences of conviction were not out of all proportion to the gravity. Properly assessed, the offending was of low seriousness and the direct and indirect consequences (including loss of mana and stigma) would be out of all proportion, so the appeal must be allowed: time to appeal extended, convictions and sentences quashed…
26 Jun 2019

FIELDING v R [2019] NZHC 1472

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1472
Court

High Court

The High Court found a miscarriage of justice because relevant mitigating material and the true consequences of conviction (mental health harm, loss of homestay role and employment prospects) were not before the District Court; those consequences are out of all proportion to the gravity of a single wilful trespass offence; therefore conviction was quashed and the appellant discharged without conviction under s 106 Sentencing Act 2002.
11 Mar 2019

THOMAS v R [2019] NZHC 396

Citation

[2019] NZHC 396
Court

High Court

The High Court held that the particular offending was serious (medium-to-high gravity) because the appellant's false statement successfully diverted police and prevented an evidential breath test of the actual driver, and the consequences of conviction advanced were speculative and did not outweigh the gravity; accordingly a discharge under s 106 was refused and the District Court sentence of three months' community detention was not manifestly excessive and was affirmed.
13 Feb 2019

WEERASINGHE v POLICE [2019] NZHC 139

Citation

[2019] NZHC 139
Court

High Court

The High Court allowed the appeal, holding that Judge Roberts erred in giving no weight to probative affidavit evidence about employment consequences; the appellant faced a real and appreciable risk that a conviction would blight his prospects of permanent employment in his industry, and that consequence was out of all proportion to the gravity of the offending under s 107 Sentencing Act 2002, therefore the conviction was quashed and the appellant discharged without conviction.