Coupe v The King - [2025] NZHC 3586

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2025-404-398

[2025] NZHC 3586

BETWEEN
AARON COUPE

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

Hearing: 13 October 2025

Appearances:

M Kan and K M McEntee for the Appellant D M A Wiseman for the Respondent

Judgment:

24 November 2025

JUDGMENT OF GARDINER J

[Appeal against sentence]

This judgment was delivered by me on 24 November 2025 at 3.00 pm Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:
Michael Kan Law, Auckland MC, Auckland

COUPE v R [2025] NZHC 3586 [24 November 2025]

Introduction

[1] Aaron Coupe appeals the decision of Judge K Maxwell sentencing him to three years and nine months’ imprisonment.1 Mr Coupe was sentenced for:

(a)managing or controlling a business while a bankrupt without the consent of the Official Assignee or the court (representative);2 and

(b)being a bankrupt and concealing property of over $500 (x 2).3

[2] Mr Coupe appeals the sentence on the basis it was manifestly excessive because:

(a)the starting point was too high;

(b)the uplift of 12 months for personal aggravating factors was excessive;

(c)there should have been a discount allowed for psychological factors;

(d)the sentence should have been imposed concurrently, rather than cumulatively, with an earlier sentence for Companies Act offences; and

(e)the five-month reduction for totality between the two sentences was inadequate.

[3]The Crown opposes the appeal.

[4] I have reached the conclusion that considered discretely, the sentence for the present offending is not manifestly excessive. However, a notional cumulative sentence of eight years and two months’ imprisonment for this offending and the Companies Act offending is disproportionate to the gravity of the overall offending. Consequently, I reduce the sentence under appeal to two years and three months. This means that the notional cumulative sentence is six years and eight months.

1      R v Coupe [2025] NZDC 12588.
2      Insolvency Act 2006, ss 149 and 436. Maximum penalty: two years’ imprisonment.
3      Sections 420 and 428. Maximum penalty: three years’ imprisonment and/or $10,000 fine.

Background to the offending

[5] Mr Coupe was first adjudicated bankrupt on 5 October 2010. During this bankruptcy, he managed three businesses without the consent of the Official Assignee, concealed assets and misled the Official Assignee, in breach of the Insolvency Act 2006. On 5 August 2016, he was convicted and sentenced to 12 months’ home detention, 200 hours of community work and reparation of $75,100. The Crown says $50,854 of this reparation remains unpaid.

[6] As a result of this conviction, Mr Coupe was prohibited by s 382 of the Companies Act 1993 from directly or indirectly being a promoter or director of, or being concerned with or taking part in, the management of a company for five years.

[7] Despite this prohibition, Mr Coupe took part in managing five companies and acted as a promoter of three of those companies. Between early 2016 and July 2019, Mr Coupe used three companies — Greys Avenue Investments Ltd, Ascent Industries No. 33 Ltd and Liberte Investments Ltd —…

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 Coupe v The King

Details

AGLC: Coupe v The King [2025] NZHC 3586
Case: [2025] NZHC 3586
Decision Date: 24 November 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Aaron Coupe appeals against his sentence of three years and nine months’ imprisonment for managing or controlling a business while bankrupt without consent and concealing property over $500 (x 2). He argues the sentence was manifestly excessive. The Crown opposes the appeal. The court considered discretely, the sentence for the present offending was not manifestly excessive. However, a notional cumulative sentence of eight years and two months’ imprisonment for this offending and the Companies Act offending was disproportionate to the gravity of the overall offending. Consequently, the sentence was reduced to two years and three months, making the notional cumulative sentence six years and eight months.

The court considered the starting point for the concealing charges was reasonable, given the gravity of the offending. The judge correctly identified aggravating factors, including premeditation, the extent of harm and loss, the duration of the offending, and personal gain. There were no mitigating factors. The court rejected the argument that a discount for psychological factors should have been allowed as the reports were dated and did not demonstrate a causal nexus with the offending. The court also rejected the argument that the sentence should have been imposed concurrently with the Companies Act sentence. The current offending was unrelated to the Companies Act offending and occurred while on bail for the Companies Act charges. The five-month reduction for totality was deemed adequate. The appeal was allowed in part, and the sentence was reduced to two years and three months.

The final orders reflect the reduced sentence of two years and three months, to be served cumulatively with the sentence for the Companies Act offending.

Orders