Ministry of Justice >> Courts >> Youth Court >> Youth Court Decisions >> Case Summary
Police v MK TO, 4 August 2007, High Court, Wellington, CRI-2007-454-02, Mallon J
Name: Police v MK TO
Unreported
File number: CRI-2007-454-02
Court: High Court
Location: Wellington
Date: 2 August 2007
Judge: Mallon J
Charge:
CYPFA: s283(1)(f)
Key title: Reparation
Case Summary:
Successful application by the Police for leave to appeal against a decision of the HC to quash a reparation order made against the parents of a young offender pursuant to s283(f) of the Children Young Persons and Their Families Act 1989. The order was quashed on the grounds that there was no fault on the part of the parents. It was further held that it would not be reasonable to order reparation in the absence of a causative link between the parent’s fault and the offending.
Leave to appeal was sought on the question of whether Mallon J was wrong to find that a reparation order could only be made against a parent under s283(1)(f) of the CYPFA if the parent was at fault and there is a causative link between the parent’s fault and the child’s offending.
Counsel for the Police submitted that the decision was wrong on the following grounds:
a) The statutory wording of s283(1)(f) confers a wide discretion expressly limited only by whether any loss has been suffered through or by means of the offence.
b) Fault and causation, while relevant considerations, should not be elevated to pre-conditions limiting the discretion of YCJ
c) Under the CYPFA family are an integral part of ensuring YP take responsibility for their actions and reparation orders against parents are consistent with that.
Counsel for the respondents submitted that the decision supported the philosophy of the CYPFA and that to adopt the position of the Police would alienate the parents of difficult children away from the process.
Decision:
Granting leave to appeal.
The Judge agreed that the formulated question was a question of law and that the question raised was one of general or public importance. The decision is currently the only higher court guidance on whether s283(1)(f) of the CYPFA is available to those involved in the youth offending process. There is general importance in determining the correct approach to the exercise of the discretion under s283(1)(f).
|