New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Manifestly unjust

Legal area

Court

15 Nov 2023

WHEELER v R [2023] NZCA 563

Citation

[2023] NZCA 563
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held that although the judge had wrongly applied a requirement that both the offence and the offender be exceptional to displace the presumption of life imprisonment, on the facts the appellant's conduct and long-standing propensity for violence, together with public protection considerations, meant a life sentence with the statutory 10-year MPI was not manifestly unjust; extension of time to appeal was granted and the appeal was dismissed.
13 Sept 2023

PURUTANGA v R [2023] NZCA 442

Citation

[2023] NZCA 442
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held s 104(1) applied because the murder involved high brutality and the victim was particularly vulnerable; the judge's notional starting point was within range and a one year discount for a late guilty plea was justified given delays and the defendant's conduct; the offender's personal circumstances did not materially reduce moral culpability; consequently a 17 year MPI was not manifestly unjust and the appeal was dismissed.
31 Aug 2023

KAINE VAN HEMERT v R [2023] NZSC 116

Citation

[2023] NZSC 116
Court

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that s 102 requires an overall weighing of the circumstances of the offence and the offender and that the Court of Appeal erred in treating the elements as conjunctive vetoes; however, on the facts the combination of factors—serious brutality and victim vulnerability, significant public safety concerns, and the appellant's limited remorse and social supports—meant it was not manifestly unjust to impose life imprisonment; the minimum period of imprisonment imposed on re-sentencing (11.5 years) was excessive and was quashed and substituted with the statutory minimum of 10…
12 Jul 2023

FROST v R [2023] NZCA 294

Citation

[2023] NZCA 294
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court upheld the High Court's 23-year starting point as not erroneous, rejected adoption of the Modified Discount Methodology, awarded a two-year reduction for early guilty pleas and a separate three-year reduction for personal mitigation (youth, mental health history, lack of prior convictions), resulting in substitution of the MPI from 20 years to 18 years.
10 Nov 2022

JOSEPH KARAITIANA WHEELER v R [2022] NZSC 129

Citation

[2022] NZSC 129
Court

Supreme Court

The application for direct leave to appeal did not demonstrate exceptional circumstances under s75(b) Senior Courts Act 2016, the issue had not been considered by the Court of Appeal so the Supreme Court would not benefit from that Court's views, and the argument can be advanced in the Van Hemert appeal; therefore leave and the extension of time were refused.
14 Jun 2022

R v AKASH [2022] NZHC 1387

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1387
Court

High Court

Starting point set at 18 years for the especially bad murder given extreme brutality; deduct three years to reflect substantial nexus between the defendant's psychotic illness and the offending (while also accounting for methamphetamine use and concealment conduct), producing a minimum period of 15 years which the Judge found not manifestly unjust given defendant's youth and lack of prior record but significant culpability.
5 Nov 2021

R v LAWRENCE [2021] NZHC 2992

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2992
Court

High Court

Section 104(1)(g) was engaged because the victim was particularly vulnerable, but imposing the prescriptive 17 year MPI would be manifestly unjust given the offender's circumstances (caregiver burden, sleep deprivation, desire to end terminal suffering, low risk of reoffending). Accordingly the presumption in s102 was displaced and the Court imposed a finite sentence of six years six months imprisonment and declined to impose an MPI under s86.
19 Aug 2020

THOMPSON v R [2020] NZCA 355

Citation

[2020] NZCA 355
Court

Court of Appeal

Life imprisonment was not manifestly unjust because the delusional disorder was not shown to be the but‑for cause of the deliberate, callous killing that fell within s104; however the offender's mental disorder and age warranted a reduction in the minimum period of imprisonment and the Court admitted the fresh psychiatric report as relevant to sentencing causation.
2 Jun 2020

R v K TE POONO [2020] NZHC 1188

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1188
Court

High Court

The Court held that the defendant's personal circumstances and mental disorder did not make life imprisonment manifestly unjust; aggravating features (close‑range shotgun shot, partial premeditation, leaving the wounded victim) justified a serious sentence but, on balance and having regard to comparable authorities and mitigation, the statutory minimum period of 10 years before parole eligibility was sufficient; accordingly the defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum period of 10 years and an order for destruction of the firearm.
11 Feb 2016

R v KINGI [2016] NZHC 139

Citation

[2016] NZHC 139
Court

High Court

The Court held that although s86E mandates life imprisonment without parole for a stage 2 murder unless it would be manifestly unjust, on the facts before it (offender's age, extensive serious mental illness reducing culpability, early guilty plea, remorse, prospects for rehabilitation, and the relatively minor first strike) imposing life without parole would be manifestly unjust; therefore the offender is sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum period of 13 years.