Reserved judgment — review of reparation orders — Sentencing Act 2002, ss 14 & 38A — Summary Proceedings Act 1957, ss 80, 81 & 86 — Taumata v MAF HC Gisborne AP2/89, 6 July 1989 — Kale v Wier HC Gisborne AO23/89 5 February 1990 — MAF v Finn (1994) 12 CRNZ 127. The Court reviewed past reparation orders against the defendant, after noticing that she owed reparations of $6784 as well as a large amount in fines. Some of the outstanding amounts related to orders made as long ago as 1999. As required by s 38A of the Sentencing Act, the Court had written to each person to whom reparations were owed to inform them of the review and of their right to express an opinion. Nobody had responded to the letters. The Court was satisfied that the defendant lacked the means to pay the outstanding reparations. All of the reparation orders, except for the most recent one of $175 from May 2019, were cancelled. The Court declined to substitute alternative sentences for the reparation orders, given the time that had passed since the orders were made. Judgment Date: 27 June 2023