Reserved decision — driver’s licence — passenger endorsement — revocation of endorsement — fit and proper person — undue influence — unreasonableness — Criminal Procedure Act, s 147 — Land Transport Act 1998, ss 30C, 30D, 30E & 106 — Evidence Act 2006, s 35 — Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Rule 1999 cl 27, 35 & 82 — Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1. The respondent had revoked the appellant's driver licence passenger endorsement, on the grounds that the appellant was not a fit and proper person. This revocation came after the appellant was convicted on sexual violation charges, and subsequently acquitted by the Court of Appeal who quashed the conviction. The appellant appealed the revocation decision to the Court, submitting that the respondent had failed to give proper weight to his eventual acquittal and to the presumption of innocence, and that the respondent's decision was therefore unreasonable. The Court examined the relevant legislation and the respondent's decision. The Court considered that the respondent's decision was overly reliant on submissions from the police, and that he had wrongly characterised the defendant's acquittal as being based on a "technicality". In fact, the trial that led to the defendant's conviction had been fundamentally flawed. The respondent had clearly decided that the appellant was guilty on the charges, regardless of his eventual acquittal. The appellant was correct that the respondent had failed to give proper weight to the Court of Appeal decision. Also, the respondent had failed to consider the weaknesses in the prosecution case and had failed to view all the evidence that the appellant had submitted at trial. The Court quashed the respondent's decision and allowed the appeal. Judgment Date: 21 March 2023.