Jia v Auckland Council

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2017-404-000184

[2018] NZHC 1133

BETWEEN

WENZHI JIA and JIANYING ZHANG

Appellants

AND

AUCKLAND COUNCIL

Respondent

Hearing:

11 December 2017

Appearances:

Appellants in Person

Brandon Watts for the Respondent

Judgment:

22 May 2018

JUDGMENT OF MOORE J

[Appeal against conviction and sentence]

This judgment was delivered by me on 22 May 2018 at 3:00 pm pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/ Deputy Registrar Date:

JIA & ANOR v AUCKLAND COUNCIL [2018] NZHC 1133 [22 May 2018]

Contents

Paragraph Number

Introduction.............................................................................................................. [1]

Background facts..................................................................................................... [4]

Procedural history................................................................................................. [23]

Fresh evidence........................................................................................................ [49]

Conviction appeal.................................................................................................. [55]

Legal principles................................................................................................... [55]

The conviction decision...................................................................................... [59]

Grounds of appeal............................................................................................... [69]

The use the property was being put to................................................................ [76]

Was the use an existing use?.............................................................................. [94]

The liability of Ms Zhang and Mr Jia.............................................................. [110]

Other procedural complaints............................................................................ [118]

The abatement notice........................................................................................ [128]

Conclusion........................................................................................................ [138]

Sentence appeal.................................................................................................... [139]

Appellate principles........................................................................................... [139]

The sentencing decision.................................................................................... [141]

Approach........................................................................................................... [147]

Methodology...................................................................................................... [149]

Assessment........................................................................................................ [154]

Result.................................................................................................................... [163]

Introduction

[1]                   The appellants, Wenzhi Jia (“Mr Jia”) and Jianying Zhang, (“Ms Zhang”) faced charges brought by the Auckland Council (“the Council”) under the Resource Management Act 1991 (“the Act”).

[2]                   The prosecution alleged they unlawfully used a house in Mt Roskill as multi- residential units, and in Ms Zhang’s case also failed to comply with abatement notices requiring that use to stop. The Judge-alone trial took place before Judge D A Kirkpatrick. The defendants represented themselves.

[3]                   Both defendants were convicted1 and fined.2 They now appeal their convictions and sentence.

Background facts

[4]                   The property in question is a two storey residential building at 355 Richardson Road, Mt Roskill (“the property”). It is approximately 905 m2. It has a rear yard of approximately 300 m2 and each floor has a foot print of approximately 280 m2, making a total area across the two levels of 560 m2.

[5]                   At all material times Ms Zhang was the registered proprietor of the property. She lived there with Mr Jia. The Council’s case is that Mr Jia and Ms Zhang were married although at the hearing before me that claim was challenged.

[6]The charges are reproduced below:

Mr Jia and Ms Zhang jointly

(a)on 6 November 2013 they contravened s 9(3) of the Act by using the land at the property in a manner that contravenes a District Rule, namely rr 7.7.2.1 and 7.8.1.8B of the Plan, by using the building at the property as multi-residential units; and

1      Auckland Council v Zhang [2017] NZDC 4596 [Conviction Decision].

2      Auckland Council v Zhang [2017] NZDC 8208 [Sentencing Decision].

Ms Zhang only

(b)on 6 November 2013 she contravened an abatement notice issued pursuant to s 322(1)(a)(i) of the Act and an abatement notice issued pursuant to s 322(1)(b)(ii) of the same Act, both…