Skip to main content.

Appendix 3: Identification of Sector for the Highest Fines 5–30 for the Third Period

 

Case Fine Sector Subsector Details
5 Northland Regional Council v McBreen Jenkins Construction Ltd 84 $45,000 Commercial Earthworks contractor

Guilty plea. Illegal earthworks at a subdivision. Two charges for breach of sections 9(1) and 15(1)(b). Continuing offences. 15,000 cubic metres of earthworks, most of the land was erosion prone. Almost no sediment and erosion control measures. Actual damage to the environment was no more than minor. Court held potential adverse effects were relevant and the potential was clearly there for more serious adverse effects if there had been heavier rainfall.

Court held offending was deliberate. McBreen had three previous convictions and seven infringement notices.

(R Wilson – employee of McBreen was also convicted and fined $2,500.)

The project manager was also convicted and fined see case No 17 of Appendix 3.
6 Taranaki Regional Council v Bruce Gordon Cudby and HG Cudby Ltd 85 $40,000 Commercial Cleanfill Not guilty plea. Jury trial, defendant convicted and fined $20,000 on two charges, continuing offences. Defendant and company had previous convictions. Company convicted and discharged.
7 Auckland Regional Council v Fletcher Building Ltd 86 $40,000 Industrial Board manufacturing plant Guilty plea to four charges for breach of section 15(1)(c) – four incidents. Relevant factors included – prior history of problems, low level of impact, large company. Convicted and fined $10,000 on each charge.
8 Southland Regional Council v Sandstone Dairy Ltd 87 $40,000 Agriculture Dairy

Not guilty plea. Discharge of dairy effluent in breach of section 15(1)(b) on three dates. Effluent was discharged from travelling irrigator over areas of tile drains, allowing ponding and entry into waterways. Defendant owned farm and was holder of resource consent. 440 hectare dairy farm, dairy conversion by defendant. 1,600 cows. History of warnings. Defendant argued it was not responsible for discharges because it had handed management of farm to farm manager and the discharges were the manager’s responsibility. Defendant had previous conviction for discharge of dairy effluent (November 2004, fined $3,000). BOD5, ammonia and E. coli levels were high as a result of discharge.

Defendant appealed, appeal granted, fines reduced from $60,000 to $40,000 ($10,000, $10,000 and $20,000).

Farm manager pleaded guilty to one charge, convicted and fined $3,500.
9 Otago Regional Council v Invernia Holdings Ltd 88 $37,000 Agriculture Dairy

Guilty plea by farm owner to three charges for discharge of dairy effluent in breach of section 15(1)(b). Court held – high level of carelessness/negligence, responsible for allowing young manager to run farm without proper training and supervision.

Manager (Blake Row) was also convicted and fined $150.
10 Hawkes Bay Regional Council v Ravensdown Fertiliser Co‑operative Ltd 89 $37,000 Industrial Fertiliser plant Guilty plea. Two charges of emission to air of sulphur dioxide in breach of section 15(1)(c). Defendant had RMA conviction in 2004 for discharge of fluoride into air and was fined $15,000, conviction under HSEA in 2003, two abatement notices and six infringement notices. Fined $14,000 and $23,000 and ordered to pay reparation of $8,000 to eight people directly affected.
11 Auckland Regional Council v PVL Proteins Ltd 90 $36,000 Industrial Rendering plant Guilty plea to three charges for breach of abatement notice requiring defendant to cease discharge of contaminants into air. Discharge to air in breach of abatement notice occurred on three dates over three month period. Restorative justice process – see Appendix 5 for more details. Convicted and fined $12,000 on each charge.
12 Canterbury Regional Council v Tradewood Shipping Company 91 $35,000 Commercial Shipping

Not guilty plea. Two offences. Discharge of oil from ship on two occasions on one day. Tradewood was manager of ship. First occasion 50 to 100 litres of oil discharged and second occasion 300 litres of oil. Fined $10,000 for first spill and $25,000 for second spill.

Cometa the owner of the ship was also convicted and fined – see case No 18. The difference in fine between the two defendants is because Cometa was given an allowance of $4,250 for clean up costs that it had paid.

Both defendants appealed to High Court against conviction and sentence, appeal was dismissed. Both defendants appealed to Court of Appeal against conviction, appeal was dismissed.
13 Waikato Regional Council v Plateau Farms Ltd 92 $35,000 Agriculture Dairy Guilty plea – but disputed facts – given less than guideline credit. One representative charge for discharge of effluent in breach of section 15(1)(b) – discharge to groundwater over period of more than one month. 1,200 cows. Large ponds of effluent on farm – pollution could not be quantified in empirical way – insidious, cumulative and serious. History of problems. Carelessness of high order. Defendant – group of companies controlled by family that owned number of farms. Nature of operations significant – major corporate farmer.
14 Rodney District Council v Turley Earthmoving Ltd 93 $35,000 Commercial Cleanfill operation

Guilty plea. One charge for earthworks in breach of section 9(1).

Earthworks contractor was instructed by the property owner (Christopher Brown) to deposit fill on property. Resource consent allowed 2,000 m3 of fill over area of 3,000 m3. Volume exceeded 20,000 m3 and was over area of 10,900 m2. Court held that culpability was at top end of scale, recklessness of high degree and at a certain point deliberate. Brown’s land and neighbour’s land was damaged because the work was done without proper engineering works. Profit realised by the offence of $62,524 after tax. “Serious environmental offending of a deliberate nature on a grand scale.”

Turley Earthmoving Ltd was also ordered to pay costs under section 314 of $15,000 to Council for report on earthworks and reparation of $40,000 to Brown and to neighbour.

(Brown was also prosecuted, pleaded guilty and was fined $7,500 and ordered to pay costs of $1,380.)
15 Auckland City Council v Brian Hudson and BH Property Investment Ltd 94 $35,000 Commercial Improvements to property

Guilty plea by both defendants to two charges for building double garage without consent and exceeding maximum paved area in breach of section 9(1). Property was owned by company and rented out. Hudson was sole director and shareholder of the company. Court held that offending was deliberate and premeditated. Property in area known for historic value and zoned to protect historic value. Court held that work undertaken was a “direct and serious challenge” to the integrity of provisions of the Plan. Hudson had previous conviction in 2007 for using a property as two residential units without consent (Hudson and another company he owned were each convicted and fined $2,000 plus costs of $1,600).

Company fined $18,000 and $2,000, Hudson fined $13,500 and $1,500.
16 North Shore City Council v Robert John Munro and R Munro Building & Earthmoving Contractors Ltd 95 $34,000 Commercial Contractor Guilty plea for breach of section 9(1) and abatement notice at three different sites, damage to vegetation and earthworks. Convicted and fined $24,000, $5,000 and $5,000 and enforcement order for remedial work at one site.
17 Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council v Turks Poultry Farm Ltd 96 $31,000 Industrial Poultry farm

Guilty pleas. Three charges, one for discharge of poultry material (feathers) as continuing offence and two charges for discharge of offal in breach of section 15(1)(d). Deliberate offending.

Fined $12,500 for discharge of feathers and for discharge of offal $7,500 on each charge.
18 Canterbury Regional Council v Cometa United Corporation 97 $30,750 Commercial Shipping See case No 12. Not guilty pleas. Fined $10,000 for first spill and $20,750 (allowing for clean up costs paid of $4,232) for second spill.
19 Southland Regional Council v Eatwell Development Ltd and TE Eatwell 98 $30,000 Agriculture Dairy Guilty pleas. Eatwell Development Ltd – three charges of discharge of dairy effluent in breach of section 15(1)(b) on three dates. T Eatwell – two charges of discharge of effluent on two dates. T Eatwell – sharemilker, company is family business. Considerable downstream effects. Remedial steps taken to improve system. Farm had totally inadequate effluent storage system. “Ongoing and underlying systemic failure due to inadequacy of the holding pond.” Eatwell Development Ltd fined $2,500, $7,500 and $10,000. T Eatwell fined $2,500 and $7,500.
20 Taranaki Regional Council v Roger Sorrensen 99 $30,000 Agriculture Dairy Guilty pleas. Three charges relating to breach of abatement notice and discharge of dairy effluent in breach of sections 15(1)(a) and (b). Offending was deliberate. History of warnings from Council. Fined $15,000 for breach of abatement notice and $7,500 each for breach of sections 15(1)(a) and (b).
21 Wellington Regional Council v Exide Technologies Ltd 100 $30,000 Industrial Lead battery recycling plant Guilty plea. One charge for discharge of lead to air breach of section 15(1)(c). Previous conviction for discharge of lead to air.
22 Waikato Regional Council v Te Kuiti Meat Processors Ltd 101 $30,000 Industrial Abattoir Guilty plea. One charge for discharge of meat processing effluent in breach of section 15(1)(b). One of the holding ponds for the effluent was near a tomo, the tomo collapsed and 800 to 1500 m3 of effluent discharged overland and underground into stream. Town water supply taken from stream, water used by 5,000 residents. Water had to be boiled before use for three days. Defendant took immediate steps and spent approximately $600,000 to remedy effects.
23 Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council v Shetland Farms Ltd and WP Jamieson 102 $30,000 Agriculture Dairy Early guilty plea. Shetland Farms Ltd is farm owner and operator. Jamieson is director of company. One charge against each defendant for discharge of dairy effluent in breach of section 15(1)(b) onto neighbouring forest via a pipe, continuing offence over two week period. Effluent ponded and would have entered ground water. 700 cows. Deliberate offence – effluent piped onto neighbouring land “furtively”. Defendants co-operated with Council, no history of non-compliance. Company fined $30,000 plus costs of report of $2,025 and lab costs of $294.75.
24 Manukau City Council v Russell Lesley Heenan $30,000 Residential 'Improvements to property' Guilty plea. One charge for pruning 13 mature pohutakawa trees on Council reserve in breach of section 9(1) so that defendant’s property had unobstructed view of sea, substantial damage. Defendant appealed sentence. Appeal was dismissed.
25 Canterbury Regional Council v Takamatua West Ltd 103 $30,000 Commercial Subdivision Guilty plea. One charge for discharge of sediment in breach of section 15(1)(b) from earthworks for subdivision and one charge for breach of abatement notice. Fined $10,000 for discharge, payment to resident’s association of $10,000 and Council costs of $2,000 and for breach of abatement notice fined $20,000. Two other defendants – see case 12 of Appendix 2, table on discharges without conviction.
26 Waikato Regional Council v Robert Wilkin Neal 104 $25,000 Commercial Earthworks contractor See details in case 1 in table 19. Three charges – excavating the river bed, diverting stream, soil disturbance, roading and tracking in the Waipa River Gorge. Fined $1,000 for river offences, $4,000 for stream offences, and $20,000 for Waipa Gorge offences, plus costs of $5,000.
27 Northland Regional Council v Lands & Survey Ltd and Michael Elrick 105 $25,000 Commercial Project Manager Same case as No 5 in this table. Illegal earthworks at a subdivision. Two charges against each defendant for breach of section 9(1) and 15(1)(b). Continuing offences.Lands & Survey Ltd – Project Manager, fined $12,500. Elrick – Director of Lands & Survey, fined $12,500.
28 Auckland City Council v Xao Xiang Yu 106 $25,000 Commercial Subdivision Guilty plea to seven charges for breach of section 9(1), earthworks and destruction/ damage of 11 protected trees. Defendant obtained a retrospective resource consent for the earthworks. Restorative justice conference outcomes are listed in Appendix 5. Defendant was fined $25,000.
29 Waikato Regional Council v Christopher John Carrigan Trower 107 $25,000 Agriculture Earthworks Guilty plea, earthworks in breach of section 9(3) and discharge of sediment in breach of section 15(1)(b). Defendant undertook earthworks on farm to convert farm to dairy farm, no erosion and sediment control measures, substantial impact of erosion. Fined $25,000 for earthworks and ordered to pay costs of $1,095 for report on impact of sediment on tributary. (Also fined $18,000 for discharge of dairy effluent.)
30 Taranaki Regional Council v Fonterra Co‑operative Group Ltd 108 $25,000 Industrial Dairy factory Guilty plea to one charge for discharge of cream in breach of section 15(1)(b). Approximately 5,000 litres of cream discharged from offshore outfall, cream in form of large globules of fat washed onto
5–6 km length of shore, bad odour, defendant is large entity, substantial clean up by defendant.

 

84 12/09/06, Judges Newhook and Dwyer, DC Whangarei, CRN 5084500347, 349, 366, 368, 355, 357, 387 and 389.

85 1/03/2007, Judge Whiting, DC New Plymouth, CRI-2005-021-001442,1444.

86 16/11/2006, Judge McElrea, DC Auckland, CRI-2006-004-010308 and 015372.

87 14/12/2006, Judge Smith, DC Invercargill, CRN 06017500043, 44 and 91.

88 28/04/2008, Judge Jackson – sentencing notes not available. Details provided by Otago Regional Council.

89 24/10/2006, Judge Thompson, DC Napier, CRI-2006-041-4035.

90 13/08/2007, Judge McElrea, DC Auckland, CRI-2006-069-001093.

91 14/06/2006, Judge Smith, DC Christchurch, CRN 05009502106, 107, 103, 104. 6/10/2006, Fogarty J, HC Christchurch, CRI 2006-409-000128. CA168/07 [2007] NZCA 560, Arnold, Gendall and Priestley JJ.

92 25/01/2007, Judge Thompson, DC Rotorua, CRI – 2005-069-2345. Appeal – 17/09/07, Stevens J, DC Rotorua, CRI2007-463-000016.

93 25/10/2007, Judge McElrea, DC Auckland, CRI-2007-004-018443.

94 1/04/2008, Judge McElrea, DC Auckland, CRI-2007-004—011655 and 003898.

95 21/02/2006, Judge McElrea, DC Auckland, CRN 05044500991, 993, 2027, 2029, 2030, 0985, 2775 TO 2778.

96 18/10/2006, Judge Ross, DC Palmerston North, CRN 6031500248-50.

97 28/06/06 Judge Smith, DC Christchurch, CRN05009502103-7.

98 9/06/2008, Judge Dwyer, DC Invercargill, CRI-2008-025-001245.

99 22/01/2007, Judge Dwyer, DC Hawera, CRI 2006-021-001444.

100 6/06/2008, Judge Thompson, DC Wellington, CRI-2008-032-001297.

101 30/05/2006, Judge Harland, DC Te Kuiti, CRI-2007-073-000413.

102 18/10/2007, Judge Radford, DC Marton, CRN 2007-034 and 2007-034-23.

103 4/04/2008, Judge Smith, DC Christchurch, CRI-2007-009-004858-60-66.

104 29/11/02, Judge Thompson, DC Auckland, CRN 107500, 04,06, 07, 1075004545, 49, 51, 52, 1075004537, 41,43, 44, 1075004492, 96, 98, 99.

105 12/09/06, Judges Newhook and Dwyer, DC Whangarei, CRN 5084500347, 349, 366, 368, 355, 357, 387 and 389.

106 12/02/2008, Judge Dwyer, DC Auckland.

107 29/09/2005, Judge Smith, DC Hamilton, CRN 05072500040, 55 and 57.

108 17/08/2006, Judge Thompson, DC Hawera, CRI-2006-021-560.

 

[ |