New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Gross negligence

Legal area

Court

16 Oct 2023

R v LONGSHAW [2023] NZHC 2902

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2902
Court

High Court

Starting point of 22 months imprisonment was appropriate for a moderate level of culpability for grossly negligent omission to obtain medical assistance for a highly vulnerable adult; after allowing 25% for an immediate guilty plea and 5% for previous good character (total 30%) the global sentence reduced to 15 months which, given low risk of re-offending, suitability of address and rehabilitative needs, justified conversion to 7.5 months home detention with conditions rather than full-time imprisonment; the death was not treated as a causative aggravating factor because causation was not est…
3 Sept 2021

KAHU v R [2021] NZCA 431

Citation

[2021] NZCA 431
Court

Court of Appeal

Given the medical evidence that the child's catastrophic brain injuries were caused by significant force involving excessive flexion-extension of the head consistent with a single but violent shake amounting to gross negligence, and having regard to s9A aggravating factors and sentencing purposes, the starting point of 18 months' imprisonment and the end sentence imposed were within the appropriate range and not manifestly excessive.
3 Feb 2021

R v CARDEN-SOOLE [2021] NZHC 65

Citation

[2021] NZHC 65
Court

High Court

Starting point of four years eight months' imprisonment for manslaughter was adopted; a 25% reduction for early guilty plea and a further 17.5% reduction for youth, remorse and seven months on EM bail produced an end sentence of two years eight months' imprisonment; concurrent six months for unlawful possession of a firearm; order for destruction of the firearm.
4 Apr 2012

TRUSTEES EXECUTORS LIMITED & ORS V TRUSTEES EXECUTORS LIMITED HC WN CIV-2011-404-4418

Citation

openlaw-bf44eddc_57ed_43b5_a29c_35f1525f4dfd.pdf
Court

High Court

Summary judgment was refused because genuine factual disputes exist as to whether the defendant retained an oversight/gatekeeper duty and whether that duty was breached to a degree amounting to gross negligence, and because the limitation and agency defences under s 43(5) FTA and imputed knowledge are not so clear as to warrant a strike-out; the plaintiffs have an arguable case that requires full trial assessment.

New Zealand Case Law

R v LONGSHAW [2023] NZHC 2902

KAHU v R [2021] NZCA 431

R v CARDEN-SOOLE [2021] NZHC 65

TRUSTEES EXECUTORS LIMITED & ORS V TRUSTEES EXECUTORS LIMITED HC WN CIV-2011-404-4418