Sakaria Taulafo came to New Zealand from Samoa to play college rugby. He is pictured here eyeing up the try line during a 2009 match at Okara Park, Whangārei. Photo / NZPA
He pleaded guilty to a charge of driving with excess breath alcohol, and sought a discharge without conviction.
However, a community magistrate declined the application and convicted and fined him $300 in the Nelson District Court last June, and disqualified him from driving for six months.
A week later, he was issued a deportation liability notice, meaning he faced being sent back to Samoa unless he could convince relevant authorities otherwise.
Last November he lodged an appeal against the conviction in the District Court but that too was unsuccessful.
Taulafo then applied for leave to appeal to the High Court, which after a hearing in Nelson last week, set aside the conviction and sent the matter back to be re-heard in the District Court.
Justice Jonathan Eaton was satisfied that errors in the process adopted in the first appeal, including failure by the defence to apply to present fresh evidence, gave rise to the “real risk” that a miscarriage of justice had occurred.
High-profile rugby career
Taulafo has a high profile in Nelson’s Pasifika community, which, according to social media posts by the Nelson Tasman Pasifika Community Trust, is proud of his distinguished rugby career and his commitment to the local community.
The now 45-year-old Samoan-born loosehead prop moved to New Zealand in 2002 to play school rugby, then played for the Nelson Rugby Club, Nelson Bays and the Tasman Makos.
He left New Zealand in 2009 and played for several overseas clubs including in England and France and represented Samoa at the 2011 Rugby World Cup.
In January 2023, he returned to New Zealand, where he had established lengthy ties, including a family, the High Court decision said.
He was caught drink-driving the following year, and a conviction followed in 2025.
‘Temporary class’ visa
Justice Eaton said in his decision released to NZME that when Taulafo applied for a discharge without conviction he held an Accredited Employer Work Visa.
As a temporary class visa holder, Taulafo was liable to be deported.
When he appeared before the magistrate, he relied on an affidavit from an immigration lawyer who outlined that a conviction may “considerably increase the risk” of deportation from New Zealand.
It also noted Taulafo had previous convictions, including one previous for driving with excess breath alcohol, but these were covered by the Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act.
That meant Taulafo was not required to declare those convictions in a further visa application he needed if he was to remain lawfully in New Zealand.
Justice Eaton said the magistrate found that for a temporary visa holder, criminal offending of any kind triggered deportation liability, rather than a conviction.
He said the arrival of a deportation liability notice a week after the conviction was entered was a “significant development”, particularly in light of the immigration lawyer’s evidence that it was unlikely a liability notice would be issued.
High Court appeal
Taulafo then applied to the High Court for leave to bring a second appeal against conviction, on the grounds it raised a question of public importance or, alternatively that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred.
The Crown opposed the grounds, saying the application for leave sought to re-litigate the specific facts of Taulafo’s case.
Justice Eaton declined leave to appeal on the first ground, but was satisfied that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred, despite it being finely balanced.
Taulafo’s lawyer, Steven Zindel, submitted that several errors had given rise to a miscarriage of justice and that both the magistrate and judge erred in concluding that, despite uncontradicted expert opinion, Taulafo was at no greater risk of deportation with or without a conviction.
Error accepted; proper process ‘not followed’
Zindel accepted it was an error that no application had been made to offer fresh evidence on the first appeal, but the judge had erred in failing to engage in a fresh assessment.
Justice Eaton said the deportation liability notice was central to Taulafo’s first appeal, and should have been before the court by way of an application to admit fresh material on appeal.
He felt if proper process had been followed, the trigger for why the notice was issued and its relevance in considering the consequences of a conviction would have been more closely scrutinised by the judge.
Further, the judge did not engage with a further consequence of a conviction being that Immigration New Zealand would likely treat Taulafo as a repeat offender.
“Standing back, I am satisfied that the errors in the process adopted at the first appeal have given rise to the real risk that a miscarriage of justice has occurred.
“In those circumstances, I agree with counsel that the appropriate remedy is to remit the case to the District Court,” Justice Eaton said in allowing the appeal and setting aside the conviction.
Taulafo did not respond to a request for comment.
Tracy Neal is a Nelson-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She was previously RNZ’s regional reporter in Nelson-Marlborough and has covered general news, including court and local government for the Nelson Mail.