Café owner gets home detention in $335K migrant exploitation conviction
MINT IMAGES
A Murupara café owner has been sentenced to 10 months 'home detention and ordered to pay $175,000 after exploiting migrant workers and providing false and misleading information to immigration authorities.
Ratha Ny, owner and director of the Bakehouse Café in Murupara, appeared at Rotorua District Court on 14 August for sentencing.
Ny pleaded guilty in March to four charges under the Immigration Act 2009 for giving false or misleading information to Immigration New Zealand.
His company, R.S.X Limited, also admitted six charges for serious breaches of employment law, including knowingly underpaying employees below the minimum wage and failing to correctly pay holiday and related entitlements.
The court fined the company $150,000 and ordered to pay $25,000 in emotional harm reparations to three victims.
The payments, made before sentencing, included $10,000 to each of two workers and $5,000 to a third. That brought the total court-imposed penalty to $175,000.
Those penalties were in addition to $160,000 in minimum wage arrears that had been repaid to affected staff before sentencing, bringing the total financial cost to the company - including fines, reparations and wage arrears - to $335,000.
Ny was sentenced to 10 months' home detention. The court initially set a starting point of 30 months in prison, reduced to 21 months after discounts were applied.
Steve Watson, general manager of Immigration Compliance and Investigation at the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, said the exploitation of temporary migrant workers was unacceptable and a clear breach of New Zealand law.
"It's rare for emotional harm payments to be awarded in these cases, so this outcome is a real win for the victims," Watson said. "It sends a strong message that the emotional toll of exploitation is being recognized and taken seriously."
Under the Immigration Act, exploiting temporary migrants or those working unlawfully is a criminal offence punishable by up to seven years in prison and/or a fine of up to $100,000.
MBIE urged anyone who suspects workplace exploitation to report it immediately by calling 0800 200 088.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
2 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Police use new DNA tech to re-examine death of 6-year-old, 45 years on
Police are using DNA to try to solve the 1980 murder of six-year-old Alicia O'Reilly, who was killed at her Avondale home. Photo: Photo by ANIRUDH on Unsplash Warning: this story discusses details of the murder and assault of a child. Police have announced they are examining new evidence, and hope to use a forensic tool to solve the murder of six-year-old Alicia O'Reilly, who was killed in Auckland 45 years ago. A police statement on Saturday said O'Reilly was raped and was killed at her Canal Road home in the suburb of Avondale early on 16 August 1980. At this stage nobody has been convicted for her death. O'Reilly's case was reopened in 2020 and the investigation dubbed Operation Sturbridge. In a statement, Detective Inspector Scott Beard said on Saturday that a DNA sample had been obtained, which police hope could provide leads. Police are also working with a new technology, trailing an Investigative Genetic Genealogy tool, he said. "This is a slow process, and we are working carefully through this trial. "Modern scientific technology continues to advance, and we are working very closely with PHF Science to try and establish a DNA link to a potential offender." Alicia O'Reilly was murdered in 1980, when she was just six years old. Photo: Supplied/New Zealand Herald More to come ... If it is an emergency and you feel like you or someone else is at risk, call 111. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
Ban on protesting outside homes rebalances freedom of expression and privacy rights
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has announced protesting outside someone's home will become an offence. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii The government's ban on protesting outside someone's home will rebalance the right to freedom of expression and the right to privacy, a law professor says. But another academic has questioned whether a new law is necessary, and says police may struggle to enforce it. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith announced on Friday protesting outside someone's home would become an offence, punishable with a fine or jail time. While it would apply to all residences, Goldsmith said there had been increased reports of demonstrations targeting the homes of public figures like MPs, judges and other officials. Otago University law professor Andrew Geddis said current laws around protests only related to public settings. "Protests that take place outside someone's home really do intrude into a sort of domestic sphere where people usually feel they should be able to exist unperturbed and unthreatened," he said. "So this particular change in the law will help to restrike that balance." Otago University law professor Andrew Geddis. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly Geddis said the change would plug a legal gap highlighted by a Supreme Court ruling nearly two decades ago. The 2007 case, Brooker v Police, involved a man who was convicted of disorderly behaviour for standing outside a police officer's house playing the guitar and singing protest songs against her, he said. But the Supreme Court found his behaviour was not disorderly. "The Supreme Court said that disorderly behaviour only applies to the public consequences of your behaviour, how that affects the public place. "And just because it's intruding into someone's private home, that's not a consideration as to whether the protest is covered by disorderly behaviour," he said. It meant the balance between people's rights within their home and people's rights to protest in public was "out of whack", Geddis said. One of the judges noted the court's finding could lead to more protests outside people's homes, and Parliament would need to consider that at some point, he said. "It turns out he was right." Victoria University law professor Steven Price said police may find it hard to enforce the new law. Goldsmith said it would be tightly targeted and prohibit "unreasonable disruptions", but Price said the independent police watchdog's review of policing protests found officers struggled to make a call on that. "What the IPCA had to say about that ... is that police have trouble on the ground having to make fine distinctions about what's an unreasonable disruption and what's not, and that seems a fair point to make," he said. "But on the face of [Goldsmith's] press release, it doesn't really solve the problem." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Who pays when a supermarket price tag is wrong?
A Whanganui SuperValue displayed some dodgy maths recently, with the price per 100g not adding up to the main price shown. Photo: Supplied When a Whanganui SuperValue displayed some dodgy maths recently, shopper David Bradbury argued he should have been able to choose to pay the lower of the prices on offer. He spotted bacon that was advertised as selling for a different price per 100g than the main display price. Shoulder bacon was 200g for $4.69 but then 94c per 100g, and middle bacon was 200g for $5.79 but $1.16 per 100g. "I pointed out to the closest person in a shop uniform the poor arithmetic ... He said the big number was the right one. I said I should be able to choose. He said no." A SuperValue spokesperson said the unit price was incorrect . "On our pricing tickets customers will find the price of the item and a unit price which enables them to make an informed decision of value based on the unit of measure. "In this instance, the unit price was incorrect on the 200gm Grandpas Shoulder Bacon and Middle Bacon products. The price was however the correct price the customer would have paid at the apologise for the error and any confusion caused. "We know how important it is that all of our tickets are accurate and we have now corrected the pricing tickets to reflect the correct unit price." Vanessa Horne, Commerce Commission general manager, competition, fair trading and credit said she encouraged him to report the concern so the commission could assess whether the shop was complying with the laws it enforced. "The trader could be prosecuted where there is serious non-compliance with the Unit Pricing Regulations. "The Unit Pricing Regulations are there to help consumers easily compare products based on the price-per-unit and make informed choices about which product offers them the best value." She said the Commerce Commission had ongoing investigations into supermarket operators . "We have recently filed criminal charges against Woolworths NZ, Pak'nSave Silverdale, and Pak'nSave Mill Street for what the Commission alleges was inaccurate pricing and misleading specials that may have breached the Fair Trading Act. "Supermarkets have long been on notice about the importance of accurate and clear pricing and specials, and we're not satisfied with the continuing issues we're seeing across the industry. "The major supermarkets are large, well-resourced businesses that should invest the time and effort to get pricing and promotions right." Consumer NZ spokesperson Sahar Lone said a supermarket that displayed incorrect unit pricing could be breaching the Fair Trading Act. "If you notice an incorrect unit price, point this out to a supervisor in store. The store has the right to correct its pricing mistakes. If it doesn't sort the issue, or it's widespread, you can lodge a complaint with the Commerce Commission." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
