Sentencing
principles on conviction for corruption and bribery mirror those for commercial
fraud ruled Justice Fitzgerald when sentencing contractor Stephen James Borlase
to five years six months jail and Auckland City employee Murray John Noone to
five years jail for corruption in relation to local authority roading
contracts.
As director of contractor
Projenz (2005) Ltd, Borlase was convicted of corruption after providing
benefits in excess of one million dollars to employees of Rodney District
Council and Auckland City over a seven year period. Payments covered overseas travel, hotel
accommodation, iPads, mobile phone bills and invoices for non-existent
consulting services. Auckland City
employee Noone was the direct recipient of benefits totalling some $1.1 million.
This was not a
victimless crime, Justice Fitzgerald said. Auckland City incurred substantial
legal and accounting costs investigating the relationship between Borlase and
Noone. Auckland City and Auckland
Transport employees suffered reputational damage and ongoing public suspicion
after news of corrupt payments became public.
This offending also tarnished New Zealand’s reputation as a nation where
public corruption is virtually non-existent.
The level of corruption
described in evidence exceeded anything previously before the courts. Justice Fitzgerald used principles applied to
commercial fraud convictions in deciding length of jail terms for the two
convicted: the magnitude and sophistication of the offending; motivation for
the offending; extent of losses; period over which the offending took place;
seriousness of any breaches of trust; and the impact on victims.
R. v.
Borlase v. Noone - High Court (22.02.17)
17.014