New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Aiding and abetting

Legal area

Court

19 Sept 2023

FOLEY v R [2023] NZCA 456

Citation

[2023] NZCA 456
Court

Court of Appeal

The District Court sentence was manifestly excessive because the starting point improperly relied on the appellant's prior non-conviction conduct; focusing solely on the offending the appropriate starting point is two and a half years with at least 10% total discounts for personal factors; further evidence on reparation and employment is admissible and the matter is remitted to the District Court for resentencing with leave to adduce that evidence.
14 Sept 2022

POME’E v INLAND REVENUE DEPARTMENT [2022] NZHC 2354

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2354
Court

High Court

The High Court held the District Court starting point of four years six months was within a defensible range given the scale, duration and nature of the offending and the amounts involved; the agreed summary of facts was binding and could not be challenged at this appeal; involuntary reparation attracts only limited reduction and voluntary reparation is a mitigation factor already applied; remorse did not justify further deduction beyond that reflected in reparation and personal factor allowances; home detention was not available because the end sentence exceeded the statutory threshold; acco…
16 Dec 2016

COMMERCE COMMISSION v BARFOOT & THOMPSON LTD [2016] NZHC 3111

Citation

[2016] NZHC 3111
Court

High Court

The Court held the PPL Agreement constituted price-fixing within s30 and therefore contravened s27; it approved the parties' agreed pecuniary penalties as within appropriate ranges, entered declarations of contravention against Barfoot & Thompson, Harcourts, LJ Hooker and Ray White, declared Property Page aided and abetted the contravention, imposed the agreed penalties and granted limited deferrals where justified.
10 Oct 2016

HENDERSON v R [2016] NZCA 431

Citation

[2016] NZCA 431
Court

Court of Appeal

Viewed in the full context of the three-phase trial the Judge's robust and at times forthright remarks were provisional trial-management interventions aimed at focusing the defence on the substantive Crown case; the Judge repeatedly granted adjournments and opportunities to respond, and a fair-minded lay observer would not reasonably apprehend that the Judge had failed to bring an impartial mind to the determination of guilt; accordingly the appeal against conviction is dismissed.
15 Mar 2016

RANGITAWA v COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2016] NZHC 444

Citation

[2016] NZHC 444
Court

High Court

The High Court held the starting point of 18 months and a 20% guilty plea discount were within range but the sentencing Judge erred in concluding that home detention could not provide adequate denunciation and deterrence; accordingly the 14 month imprisonment was quashed and substituted with four months' home detention and 300 hours' community work.
1 Mar 2016

DEUCE DERRICK JUNIOR EVO SAVAGE v R [2016] NZSC 19

Citation

[2016] NZSC 19
Court

Supreme Court

The Court refused leave because the Court of Appeal correctly held that the totality of the evidence (Savage's presence, manner and the victim's perception of intimidation) supported an inference that Savage intentionally assisted Ngaheu, and that the judge's identification warning satisfied statutory purpose; no error of principle or risk of miscarriage of justice was demonstrated.

New Zealand Case Law

FOLEY v R [2023] NZCA 456

POME’E v INLAND REVENUE DEPARTMENT [2022] NZHC 2354

COMMERCE COMMISSION v BARFOOT & THOMPSON LTD [2016] NZHC 3111

HENDERSON v R [2016] NZCA 431

RANGITAWA v COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2016] NZHC 444

DEUCE DERRICK JUNIOR EVO SAVAGE v R [2016] NZSC 19