Search Results

1. OT v KD [2024] NZDT 49 (15 February 2024) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...house, that KD had entered her property. She had driven home and, after having gone inside her house and re-emerged, found that her vehicle had gone. It was subsequently recovered in [City], in KD’s possession. KD was charged with its theft; he had pleaded guilty in the District Court, and had been ordered to pay OT reparation of $500.00, the value of her insurance excess. [3] OT said that she had bought the vehicle from [car manufacturer]. It was on hire purchase for which she was re...

2. 2023 NZPSPLA 078 [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...certificate of approval. Mr Alaiasa is advised that the cancellation of his certificate of approval is grounds for disqualification under s 62(h) of the Act for the next 7 years. The convictions that are the likely result of Mr Alaiasa’s guilty pleas on the offences of violence charges will be further grounds for disqualification for 7 years. [13] Mr Alaiasa can however reapply for a certificate of approval within the 7-year period, but to be successful with such an application he...

3. CM-Position-Profile-2024 [docx, 41 KB]

   ...expands upon that of Justices of the Peace. Community Magistrates have jurisdiction to conduct defended hearings for a wide range of non-imprisonable offences. Community Magistrates can also impose sentences on persons who have been found guilty of or pleaded guilty to certain minor imprisonable offences. Community Magistrates do not have the power to imprison offenders, but they may impose a range of other sentences, such as reparation, community-based sentences (such as community detention o...

4. Three strikes law

   ...from the previous Three Strikes regime that meet these thresholds; extends the use of the “manifestly unjust” exception to allow some judicial discretion to avoid very harsh outcomes and address outlier cases; provides a limited benefit for guilty pleas to avoid re-traumatisation of victims, and to improve court delays; and ensures that people who commit murder at second or third strike receive an appropriately lengthy non-parole period. The Ministry of Justice will undertake a post-implem...

   Located in:

   1. Justice sector & policy >
   2. Key initiatives

5. Auckland Standards Committee v Raheman [2010] NZLCDT 5 [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...commenced at about 9.40 am with Mr Collins representing the Standards Committee of the New Zealand Law Society and beginning his submissions, but Mr Raheman arrived shortly after that time and so the charges were formally read to him and he has pleaded guilty to both of the charges. [2] He has then had the opportunity to respond to Mr Collins’ submissions and make his plea to the Disciplinary Tribunal for what he refers to as a second chance in this profession. Charges...

6. CM-Position-Profile-2025LwrNrth [docx, 42 KB]

   ...expands upon that of Justices of the Peace. Community Magistrates have jurisdiction to conduct defended hearings for a wide range of non-imprisonable offences. Community Magistrates can also impose sentences on persons who have been found guilty of or pleaded guilty to certain minor imprisonable offences. Community Magistrates do not have the power to imprison offenders, but they may impose a range of other sentences, such as reparation, community-based sentences (such as community detention o...

7. CM-Position-Profile-2025Northisland [docx, 42 KB]

   ...expands upon that of Justices of the Peace. Community Magistrates have jurisdiction to conduct defended hearings for a wide range of non-imprisonable offences. Community Magistrates can also impose sentences on persons who have been found guilty of or pleaded guilty to certain minor imprisonable offences. Community Magistrates do not have the power to imprison offenders, but they may impose a range of other sentences, such as reparation, community-based sentences (such as community detention o...

8. Auckland Standards Committee v Matheson [2015] NZLCDT 4 [pdf, 74 KB]

   ...to simply reflect this charge under s 241(d) and the Standards Committee sought leave to withdraw the second charge of misconduct. [2] There was also an amendment to the particulars or to the form of the charge, in that the conviction is only pleaded as that being one which brings the profession into disrepute, and the “reflection on fitness to practice” limb part of the subsection was withdrawn and so is not before us. On that basis, Mr Matheson has admitted the charge and I...

9. AD v Secretary for Justice 2 April 2012 NZRA 000006 [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...senior counsel since 2006 for offences of aggravated robbery, rape, drugs and serious assaults. She has had active involvement in Category 4 matters the most important and extensive of which was a manslaughter trial which resulted in a guilty plea after the jury had been empanelled and there had been prior extensive legal argument over a day and a half resulting in the Crown making a concession for sentencing purposes. [8] It appears that the applicant sought approval as a Categor...

10. X v B LCRO 11 / 2008 (26 March 2009) [pdf, 16 KB]

    ...delay was addressed as part of the original investigation and decision of the former Complaints Committee. Clients X accept that they did raise delay in their original complaint when they included a complaint that their lawyer had ignored their pleas to “get on with our case”. But it seems that they considered this to be incidental to the other heads of complaint. The second complaint focused solely on the matter of delay, that Lawyer B had failed to “start the case” and �...