New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Statutory release date calculation

Legal area

Court

17 Dec 2019

ROMANOV v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND OTHERS [2019] NZHC 3358

Citation

[2019] NZHC 3358
Court

High Court

The plaintiff's claims were dismissed because the core issues (parole eligibility date, validity and timing of the s107 order, and timeliness of the s66 recall) had been finally determined in prior High Court judgments, estopping relitigation and making the new proceedings an abuse of process; independently, the statutory scheme (Parole Act and Criminal Justice Act) supports the defendants' calculations (parole eligibility 10 November 2008; statutory release date 10 March 2015) and the s107 and s66 decisions were lawful.
5 Sept 2019

YURAK v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2019] NZHC 2206

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2206
Court

High Court

Where an offender was sentenced to imprisonment, had that sentence converted to home detention and later re-sentenced to imprisonment for the same offending, the period spent serving the original term of imprisonment must be taken into account in calculating the total period of detention and the statutory release date; the mechanical calculation of pre-sentence detention and key dates is for the Department of Corrections under the Parole Act (ss88,90–92) and not for the re-sentencing judge, and statutes must be read purposively and consistently with s22 NZBORA to avoid arbitrary detention.
15 May 2019

YURAK v POLICE [2019] NZHC 1057

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1057
Court

High Court

Where there is urgent agreement that continued incarceration beyond the agreed statutory release date would be unlawful or manifestly excessive, the Court will grant an interim habeas corpus order under s11 of the Habeas Corpus Act 2001 to secure immediate release subject to standard release conditions under s93(2) of the Sentencing Act 2002, reserving substantive statutory interpretation of how pre-substituted home detention custody is to be treated for a full hearing.
28 Sept 2018

TIHEMA v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2018] NZHC 2554

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2554
Court

High Court

The court held the three and a half months the applicant spent in custody awaiting re‑sentencing after breaching home detention should be credited for purposes of calculating statutory release; Corrections failed to show detention lawful because it excluded that remand period from the release calculation, and accordingly a writ of habeas corpus must issue ordering immediate release.
15 Apr 2016

MICHAEL MARINO v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2016] NZCA 133

Citation

[2016] NZCA 133
Court

Court of Appeal

Under the Parole Act 2002 the definition of pre-sentence detention in s91 and the requirement in s90(2) mean that where an offender is subject to two or more concurrent sentences Corrections must calculate and deduct pre-sentence detention separately for each sentence; only where cumulative sentences form a notional single sentence does s90(3) permit a single deduction. Accordingly Corrections' per-sentence calculation was correct and the appellant was lawfully detained.

New Zealand Case Law

ROMANOV v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND OTHERS [2019] NZHC 3358

YURAK v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2019] NZHC 2206

YURAK v POLICE [2019] NZHC 1057

TIHEMA v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2018] NZHC 2554

MICHAEL MARINO v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2016] NZCA 133