Illegal immigrant labour — application for discharge without conviction — exercise of court discretion for granting discharges without conviction — R v Hughes [2008] NZCA 546 — Z v R [2012] NZCA 599 — Blythe v R [2011] NZCA 190 — Immigration Act 2009, s 350(1)(b) — Sentencing Act 2002, ss 106 & 107. The defendants pleaded guilty to allowing an non-entitled person to work for their service, an offence against s 350(1)(b) of the Immigration Act. The first defendant additionally pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the second defendant in the offence. Here the defendants applied for a discharge without conviction pursuant to s 106 of the Sentencing Act. The facts of the offending were that over a three and a half-year period the second defendant employed a person who had no legal authority to work in New Zealand. The first defendant recruited and employed that person, ignoring his illegal immigration status. In deciding whether to grant the discharge, the Court had to decide whether the consequences of a conviction were out of proportion to the gravity of the offending. The prosecution opposed the application for discharge, arguing that employers need to be deterred from employing unlawful workers, who are vulnerable to exploitation. Also the offending was culpable in that continued for three and a half years. The Court considered the factors of the offending, finding that the defendants either intentionally or recklessly breached their obligations, and were dishonest. They had undermined the foundations and integrity of the immigration system. In mitigation, the defendants had entered an early guilty plea. The consequences for the defendants were likely to be that they would be less likely to employ workers on visas, and would struggle to find local workers. Immigration New Zealand had already noted the defendants' non-compliance with the law, regardless of whether or not a conviction was entered. Overall the Court found that the consequences of a conviction were not out of proportion to the gravity of the offending. The Court convicted the defendants and sentenced each to a fine of $3000. Judgment Date: 11 June 2018.