7 Dec 2022
The High Court held Judge Fraser did not err: the consequences of conviction (including possible immigration effects) were not shown to be out of all proportion to the moderately serious offending, the immigration opinion was neither fresh nor established a real and appreciable likelihood of a materially different outcome, and the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive; appeal dismissed.
5 Dec 2022
The Court held the judge did not err in fixing the guilty plea discount at 20% because the judge could lawfully consider the strength of the prosecution case and the benefit obtained by withdrawal of the attempted murder charge; delays caused by the fitness inquiry did not require a larger discount but did not invalidate the judge's approach; the resulting end sentence of five years three months was within range for the offending and not manifestly excessive, and immigration consequences are not a proper basis to alter sentences.
4 Aug 2022
The sentencing judgment's assessment that the assault was of moderately serious gravity (heavy punch causing compound jaw fracture requiring surgery) was correct; the likely immigration consequences including deportation and loss of visa/work, while serious, were not out of all proportion to that gravity; accordingly the application for discharge without conviction was correctly refused and the appeal is dismissed.
18 Jun 2021
Deportation risk arising from conviction does not make a discharge necessary because liability to deportation is a consequence of the offending and will be assessed by immigration decision‑makers on the full merits; the offending was serious (high‑speed racing, death, failure to stop, lack of licence) and the immigration consequences are not out of all proportion to that gravity, therefore refusal of discharge was correct.
3 Mar 2020
Given the objective circumstances observed by the officer (vehicle awkwardly parked with engine running, driver behind wheel displaying intoxication signs) the officer had good cause to suspect a Land Transport Act driving offence under s68(1)(b) and lawfully required a breath screening test; further, the immigration consequences did not warrant discharge because deportation would not cause exceptional family harm and immigration decisions are for the immigration authorities; appeal dismissed.
22 Nov 2017
The normal rule that costs follow the event applies in immigration judicial review proceedings; the Court exercised its discretion to award costs to the Minister on a 2B basis with reasonable disbursements, rejecting the applicant's argument that deportation made a costs order pointless and declining to defer costs pending further appeal.