Youth Court Decisions How to Use Full list of key titles CYPFA section Date

Police v L (1991) 8 FRNZ 123

Case summary provided by BROOKERS

Name: Police v L
Reported: (1991) 8 FRNZ 123
File number: YJ1283005063
Date: 21 June 1991
Court: Youth
Location: Wanganui
Judge: B D Inglis QC
Charge:
CYPF no: s245, s246, s247, s248
Key Title: Family Group Conferences – Timeframes/Limits
Brooker’s Summary:

Children and young persons - Family group conference - Convened in respect of two offences, but did not deal with young offender's third offence - Third offence characteristic of young person's pattern of offending - No need to reconvene family group conference - Youth justice coordinator not obliged to wait for Court's directions but may convene conference if offence not serious - Decisions on future of young persons not to be unduly delayed - Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989, ss 5(f), 6, 13, 208(h), 245, 246, 247, 248.

Informations were laid against the young person in respect of two offences which he committed on 13 May 1991. On 15 June 1991, a family group conference was convened and a suitable course of action was agreed upon. Unknown to that family group conference, the young person had committed a further offence on 5 June 1991 as a party in a minor respect. The third offence was characteristic of the young person's pattern of offending. The question arose as to whether a youth justice coordinator was obliged to convene a further family group conference to consider that later offence. The second question was whether a youth justice coordinator should convene a family group conference immediately on becoming aware that police action will be or has been taken against a young person, or whether the youth justice coordinator is obliged to wait until positively directed by the Court to convene a family group conference.

Held,

(1) in cases where the later offending is consistent with the general pattern of the young person's offending, there is nothing in ss 245, 246, 247, or 248 Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 to require the youth justice coordinator to convene a further family group conference in such circumstances or to wait for the Court's directions in regard to that later offending. The position may be different in a case where the nature of the further offending suggests that the young person may have turned to new avenues of criminal activity, or where the new offence is of an altogether more serious character, or where the circumstances of the offence suggest contempt for the family's efforts. In such circumstances, the youth justice coordinator, or the Court, might well feel that the family group conference ought to be reconvened.

(2) On the second question, for the youth justice coordinator to have to wait until directed by the Court to convene a family group conference would promote unacceptable delay (see s 5(f) of the Act). It is unacceptable that any young person should have to wait for any undue length of time for a decision on his or her future. A youth justice coordinator is in a very good position to assess when a family group conference ought to be convened and should not in any way feel impeded in doing so by any over-technical or [(1991) 8 FRNZ 123, 124]narrow reading of the relevant provisions of the Act. In serious cases, however, the youth justice coordinator should approach the Court for directions.

(3) The true intent of ss 245 and 246 of the Act when read together is to empower the youth justice coordinator to get on with the job as quickly as possible so that by the time the young offender comes before the Youth Court either the family group conference has been held or arrangements for it are well under way.

Obiter, the Act is an over-refined procedural and legal nightmare, but its principles and intent are perfectly clear. The Court should be slow to look for technical obstacles, but instead should encourage those concerned with its administration to ensure that young offenders — who may be at a turning-point in their lives — are dealt with quickly, fairly, with the support and assistance of their families, and within the protection of the law.

Reasons for decision

These reasons were given in relation to the Youth Court's refusal to order a second family group conference in respect of a later offence by the youth offender.