Wynn-Williams v Police CA400/03

The Court of Appeal of New Zealand heard an appeal by Luke Ernest Wynn-Williams against his conviction for driving with excess breath alcohol. Wynn-Williams contested both his conviction and the sentence imposed, but his appeal was dismissed by John Hansen J on 27 August 2003. The appeal to the Court of Appeal focused on the interpretation of section 68 of the Land Transport Act 1998, specifically whether Wynn-Williams should have been required to undergo a breath screening test. The central issue was whether he was a driver of a motor vehicle on a road at the time he was required to take the test. The appeal hinged on the interpretation of section 68(1)(a) of the Land Transport Act 1998, which allows an enforcement officer to require a driver of a motor vehicle on a road to undergo a breath screening test.

The court considered whether Wynn-Williams was a driver at the time he was required to take the breath screening test. The appellant argued that he was not considered a driver because he had not been in the vehicle for 20 to 35 minutes before being asked to take the test. The court accepted that the distinction between section 68(1)(a) and (b) is temporal, with (a) applying to a person currently driving or attempting to drive, and (b) applying to past driving if there is a good cause to suspect a recent offence. However, the court found that Wynn-Williams was sufficiently proximate to his driving to be considered a driver under section 68(1)(a). The court allowed the appeal and quashed Wynn-Williams’ conviction.