Results

Zoe successfully obtained the following discharges without conviction:

Drink driving charges

1. November 2019: An accountant was charged with driving with excess breath alcohol and careless driving, following a collision with another car.  After negotiating with police, the careless driving charge was withdrawn and my client pleaded guilty to the drink driving charge.  I obtained a discharge without conviction on the basis my client’s accounting career faced jeopardy if a conviction was entered on my client’s record.
2. October 2019: An IT professional was charged with driving with excess breath alcohol with a reading of 986.  I obtained a discharge without conviction for my client on the basis his career in IT would likely be jeopardised by such a conviction.
3. October 2019: A recently graduated engineer was charged with driving with excess breath alcohol.  I obtained a discharge without conviction for my client on the basis my client’s career in the engineering industry was jeopardised by such a conviction.
4. August 2019: An advertising executive was charged with driving with excess breath alcohol.  I obtained a discharge without conviction for my client on the basis such a conviction would likely preclude career progression in my client’s specialist advertising area.
5. June 2019: A person working in the alcohol and hospitality industry had been charged with driving with excess breath alcohol.  I obtained a discharge without conviction for my client on the basis his career required him to maintain a clean criminal record.
6. March 2019: A registered nurse was charged with driving with excess breath alcohol with a reading of 1037; over four times the limit.  I obtained a discharge without conviction for my client on the basis a conviction could result in jeopardy to my client’s employment as a nurse.
7. March 2019: A young sales rep. was charged with driving with excess blood alcohol. I obtained a discharge without conviction for my client on the basis a conviction could result in jeopardy to my client’s employment.
8. December 2018: A father of two with various work and charity obligations was charged with driving with excess blood alcohol. I obtained a discharge without conviction for my client on the basis a conviction could result in jeopardy to my client’s employment and required travel to Canada.
9. A high ranking officer in the New Zealand Army was charged with driving with excess breath alcohol and careless driving.  I obtained a discharge without conviction for him in relation to the drink driving charge on the basis his future in the New Zealand Army would be jeopardised with such a conviction on his record.
10. I have represented two employed airline pilots who were each charged with a high level drink driving offence. I obtained each of them a discharge without conviction on the basis they faced a real risk of losing their jobs if convicted of such an offence.
11. An aviation student was charged with driving with excess breath alcohol with a reading of more than twice the prosecutorial limit.  I obtained a discharge without conviction for him on the basis there was a real risk he would not obtain employment as a pilot with such a conviction.
12. I have represented two flight attendants who were each charged with a drink driving offence. I obtained each of them a discharge without conviction on the basis they faced a real risk of not being able to work as flight attendants if convicted of such an offence.
13. A young trainee pharmacist was charged with driving with excess breath alcohol. I obtained a discharge without conviction for him on the basis such a conviction risked jeopardiszing his career progression.

Other traffic charges

1. May 2019: A recruitment agent was charged with careless driving causing injury to another road user. The court accepted a conviction could result in jeopardy to my client’s employment and no conviction was entered on this basis. There was no fine, court costs or disqualification from driving imposed either.
2. April 2019: A law student was charged with careless driving causing injury to another road user. The court accepted a conviction could result in jeopardy to my client’s ambitions of working for the United Nations and no conviction was entered on this basis.
3. April 2019: A young entrepreneur was charged with driving at a dangerous speed; 226 kph in a 100 kph area.  The court accepted that a conviction could jeopardise my client’s business and travel opportunities and no conviction was entered on this basis.
4. An entrepreneur collided with a motorcyclist and was consequently charged with careless driving causing injury to the motorcyclist. The court accepted that a conviction could impede my client’s ability to grow his fledgling business as he would not be able to travel to Canada as required.
5. A student teacher was charged with driving while disqualified.  We obtained a discharge without conviction for her on the basis she was unlikely to be able to continue her university studies if she obtained a further conviction on her record (she had previously pleaded guilty to drink driving).
6. A cleaning franchise owner was charged with driving while suspended.  We obtained a discharge without conviction for him on the basis such a conviction combined with loss of licence would render him unable to run his cleaning business.

1. A father was facing a raft of driving related charges: driving with excess breath alcohol, driving while disqualified x3, and providing false details x2 (six charges in total). He also had a recent conviction for sustained loss of traction. He faced a minimum disqualification of six months for each of the disqualified driving charges as well as for the drink driving charge; amounting to at least two years disqualification from driving. We successfully applied for an order for community work in place of any disqualification. Because of this, our client was able to keep his job and continue to drive to visit his children who lived out of town.
2. A young self-employed professional man was charged with driving while suspended; he had lost his licence due to excessive demerit points. He also had relatively recent convictions for drink driving and reckless driving. We were successful in obtaining our client a sentence of community work in place of any disqualification from driving. Due to this he was able to keep his business going and remain self-employed.
3. A self-employed solo-father was charged with two counts of driving while disqualified. He faced losing his licence for a minimum of one year. He was not eligible for a limited / work licence and therefore faced the prospect of losing his business and not being able to drive his children to and from school and other important activities. We successfully applied for an order for community work in place of any disqualification; meaning our client could carry on his life as normal.
4. A young labourer was facing two charges of driving while disqualified (his fourth and fifth such charges in total). He was facing a minimum of two years disqualification from driving. We successfully obtained an order for community work in place of disqualification on the basis our client would have difficulty fulfilling his duties as a labourer if he was disqualified from driving.

1. March 2019: My client was facing charges of driving with excess breath alcohol, careless driving, failing to stop and ascertain injury following a crash, driving at dangerous speed and failing to stop for police. Following discussions with police and various steps taken by my client to make amends, the police accepted guilty pleas to two of the five possible charges; being excess breath alcohol and dangerous speed.  My client was disqualified from driving for a total of six months and ordered to pay reparation to the driver whose car was damaged.
2. February 2019: My client was charged with a his third drink driving offence within five years and was facing imprisonment or a community based sentence, as well as an alcohol interlock licence. Upon pleading guilty, my client was fined $3,000, with no imprisonment or community based sentence imposed.  The minimum period of disqualification from driving of 366 days was also imposed as the mandatory alcohol interlock licence was not suitable in this situation.
3. A nurse, and mother of three young children, was facing simultaneously: three drink driving charges and a careless driving charge. Upon pleading guilty and completing an eight week residential rehabilitation programme along with other forms of counselling, our client’s sentence was reduced from a starting point of 18 months imprisonment to four months community detention. Our client was also granted an alcohol interlock licence, which meant after three months disqualification, she would be back on the road and able to drive safely again.
4. An older gentleman had been charged with his fifth drink driving offence; his breath alcohol reading was almost twice the criminal adult limit. With a charge this serious, our client was facing a term of imprisonment. However, upon pleading guilty and completing some counselling, our client was ordered to complete 150 hours community work and disqualified from driving for the minimum period.
5. A young man had been charged with dangerous driving together with drink driving; his blood alcohol level was almost three times the criminal adult limit. After discussions with police, the dangerous driving charge was reduced to careless driving. Upon pleading guilty to the two charges, our client was fined $900 and disqualified from driving.
6. A solo-father was charged with careless driving together with drink driving; his blood alcohol level was almost twice the criminal adult limit. After discussions with police, the careless driving charge was withdrawn and our client pleaded guilty to the high level drink driving charge. He was fined $500 and disqualified for the minimum period.
7. A young man was charged with careless driving after his car had stalled suddenly on the Harbour Bridge; police had thought it was due to him running out of petrol. Upon getting the vehicle inspected, it was shown that there was, in fact, a mechanical problem with the car. Police withdraw the charge on this basis and our client walked free.
8. A young father was facing a dangerous driving charge and a minimum of 6 months disqualification from driving. After discussions with police, the charge was reduced to careless driving. Our client was fined and received no disqualification from driving.
9. A young man had been charged with dangerous driving and assault by using his vehicle as a weapon. After negotiations with police, the serious assault charge was dismissed and our client was convicted of the dangerous driving charge. He was fined $450 and disqualified for the minimum period.

1. Prior to driving, our client had responsibly tested herself on her own breath testing device. The device indicated she was under the legal limit. However, upon being stopped a short time later by police, she was found to be over the legal breath alcohol limit and was charged. We successfully applied for no disqualification based on the sensible steps our client had taken before driving. Upon conviction, she was not disqualified from driving. This is often referred to as a “section 81” or “special reasons” application.
2. Our client had driven to his local pub for a few drinks. Afterwards, he decided to walk home and leave his car there. However, before the walk home, he regrettably made the decision to move his car a short distance to a safer parking spot. As he did so, he was apprehended by police and subsequently charged with driving with excess breath alcohol. Upon conviction, our client was not disqualified from driving on the basis he was only re-parking his car and was not intending to drive any long distance.
3. Our client, a father of six who had been charged with his third drink driving offence, had appeared at court to defend his charge on five separate occasions over an 18 month period. Each time, our client’s case was not heard as the court prioritised other cases over his. We successfully applied for the charge to be dismissed (permanently stayed) on the basis there had been unreasonable delay in our client having his defence heard; he was neither convicted nor disqualified.