New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Drink driving

Legal area

Court

1 Nov 2023

MAKISI v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2023] NZHC 3066

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3066
Court

High Court

The High Court found the uplift for driving while disqualified did not amount to impermissible double counting because offending aggravating features (very high BAC and driving while on an interlock licence without a device) were distinct from personal aggravating factors (longstanding and recent recidivism); the cumulative starting point and final sentence sat within ranges established by comparable authorities (notably Himiona and Samson) and, given persistent recidivism and prior custodial sentences, home detention would not meet the necessary objectives of denunciation, deterrence and com…
24 Oct 2023

WARREN v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2023] NZHC 2965

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2965
Court

High Court

The judge did not err in refusing discharge because the evidence of collateral immigration consequences was too general and speculative to establish the required 'real and appreciable risk' that a conviction would preclude overseas travel; therefore the consequences were not out of all proportion to the moderate gravity of the offending and discharge was not justified.
21 Sept 2023

AFFLECK v POLICE [2023] NZHC 2643

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2643
Court

High Court

The High Court held the aggregate starting point of 30 months was within range given multiple recent incidents, high breath alcohol readings, dangerous driving and extensive recidivism; the two-year effective custodial sentence was not manifestly excessive and imprisonment was necessary for denunciation, deterrence and community protection; the appellant's ADHD did not render imprisonment disproportionately severe and leave to apply for home detention was not warranted.
15 Sept 2023

BURNS v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2023] NZHC 2585

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2585
Court

High Court

On rehearing the High Court applied the three-step test, concluded the offending was moderately serious, found the evidence of employment harm was equivocal and did not establish a real and appreciable risk that conviction would prevent employment in the appellant's industry, and therefore held the direct and indirect consequences of conviction were not out of all proportion to the gravity of the offence; appeal dismissed.
22 Aug 2023

HIGGINSON v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2023] NZHC 2273

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2273
Court

High Court

The District Court erred in not awarding a discrete discount for rehabilitation, but that error did not render the end sentence manifestly excessive; the four months' home detention (with six months special conditions and an alcohol interlock) was within the established range for a third or subsequent high-reading drink driving offence and varying it would amount to impermissible tinkering. The Sentencing Act s9(3) precluded a discount for voluntary alcohol consumption and there was no demonstrated causative contribution of addiction to the decision to drive in these facts.
29 May 2023

FAALOGO v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2023] NZHC 1302

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1302
Court

High Court

The appeal was dismissed because the District Court judge lawfully considered the option of a fine, took into account the appellant's personal circumstances and prior offending, and the imposition of 12 months' supervision (with seven months' disqualification) was not shown to be manifestly excessive or an error of principle warranting substitution by this Court.
1 May 2023

JUDD v POLICE [2023] NZHC 1001

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1001
Court

High Court

The High Court concluded there was no error in the District Court's exercise of discretion under s 94: the Judge properly balanced the appellant's financial hardship against public safety and deterrence, and appropriately backdated the disqualification to permit application for a limited licence; accordingly the refusal to substitute was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
3 Apr 2023

MISA v POLICE [2023] NZHC 720

Citation

[2023] NZHC 720
Court

High Court

The appeal is dismissed because the District Court judge did not err in declining to exercise the s 94 discretion: prior disqualifications had demonstrable effect, a further period of disqualification was likely to deter and protect the public, s 94 is reserved for clear cases, and therefore it was not inappropriate to order disqualification and the s 94 jurisdiction did not arise.
23 Mar 2023

SUDHAKAR v POLICE [2023] NZHC 594

Citation

[2023] NZHC 594
Court

High Court

The Court concluded the offending was moderately serious and that the available evidence did not establish the conviction itself caused the applicant's employment loss; consequences were not out of all proportion to the gravity of the offending under s107, so discharge without conviction was not warranted; appeal dismissed.
13 Apr 2022

AHMED v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2022] NZHC 769

Citation

[2022] NZHC 769
Court

High Court

The High Court held the District Court Judge did not err: the demonstrated consequences of conviction (including a likely two-year stand-down affecting a manager's certificate) were not of sufficient specificity or severity to be out of all proportion to the gravity of excess breath alcohol offending; accordingly a discharge without conviction was not warranted and the appeal is dismissed.