Charteris v The King - [2025] NZCA 244

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA112/2024
[2025] NZCA 244

BETWEEN	SIMON JOHN MINSON CHARTERIS Appellant
AND	THE KING Respondent

Hearing:	14 May 2025
Court:	Thomas, Fitzgerald and Eaton JJ
Counsel:	E J Forster and S B W Yee for Appellant M J R Blaschke for Respondent
Judgment:	16 June 2025 at 2.30 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe appeal is allowed.
BThe appellant is discharged without conviction on all three charges.
CThe fine of $3,800 is set aside and an order that the appellant pay $3,800 towards the Ministry for Primary Industries’ costs is substituted.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Thomas J)

At 54 years of age and with no prior convictions,[1] Simon Charteris was convicted of three charges of permitting without reasonable excuse rams to be transported when they were unfit for transport.[2] He now appeals against the refusal to discharge him without conviction.

Background

[1]Save for a 1987 conviction for being a minor found in a bar.

[2]Ministry for Primary Industries v Charteris [2023] NZDC 3883 [conviction judgment]; and Animal Welfare Act 1999, s 23(2)(c).

Mr Charteris was convicted of the three charges following a Judge-alone trial before Judge Matenga in the District Court at Hastings.[3]
[3]Conviction judgment, above n 2.

On sentencing Mr Charteris on 18 August 2023, the Judge accepted the gravity of the offending was low, the result of an inadvertent slip or a simple error.[4] In two instances, the rams were lame and in one the ram had an ingrown and cracked horn.[5] He also accepted that there was a real and appreciable risk of a conviction having a consequential impact on Mr Charteris’ employment.[6] But he was not persuaded the consequences of conviction would be out of all proportion to the gravity of the offending.[7] He declined Mr Charteris’ application for a discharge without conviction and fined him $3,800.[8]
[4]Ministry of Primary Industries v Charteris [2023] NZDC 12477 [discharge judgment] at [21] and [35].
[5]At [3].
[6]At [33].
[7]At [37].
[8]At [55].
Mr Charteris appealed his conviction to the High Court on the grounds the Judge erred by misapplying the onus and standard of proof, failing to identify the critical issue on the charges, and making a broad credibility preference as to the expert evidence.[9] He did not appeal his fine or the refusal to discharge him without conviction. On 22 November 2023, in the High Court, Grice J dismissed Mr Charteris’ conviction appeal.[10]
[9]Charteris v Ministry for Primary Industries [2023] NZHC 3321 [conviction appeal judgment] at [22].
[10]At [54].
Mr Charteris then sought to appeal the decision not to discharge him without conviction, by way of a sentence appeal.[11]
[11]Charteris v Ministry for Primary Industries [2024] NZHC 353 [jurisdiction judgment] at [4].
An appeal solely seeking to challenge a discharge without conviction decision is properly characterised as an appeal against conviction.[12] The High Court therefore concluded that, because Mr Charteris had already appealed his conviction, the High…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Charteris v The King

Details

AGLC: Charteris v The King [2025] NZCA 244
Case: [2025] NZCA 244
Decision Date: 16 June 2025 at 2.30 pm

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Simon Charteris appeals against his conviction for permitting rams to be transported while they were unfit for transport. The appeal focuses on the District Court's decision to refuse to discharge him without conviction and to impose a fine of $3,800. The grounds of appeal involve two alleged material errors: the disconnect between the District Court’s acceptance that the gravity of the offending was low and there was a real and appreciable risk of an impact on Mr Charteris’ employment, and the finding that those consequences would not be out of all proportion to the gravity of the offending; and the Court failed to address Mr Charteris’ personal circumstances and, had the Court done so, it was conceivable the penalty would have been reduced to the point that the test for discharge would have been met. The Court finds that the District Court erred in failing to take account of Mr Charteris’ personal circumstances in its assessment of the gravity of the offending. The Court also finds that the consequences of the conviction are out of all proportion to the gravity of the offending. The appeal is allowed. The appellant is discharged without conviction on all three charges. The fine of $3,800 is set aside and an order that the appellant pay $3,800 towards the Ministry for Primary Industries’ costs is substituted.

Orders