Sentencing — immigration exploitation — aided and abetted — discharge without conviction — Immigration Act 2009 — Holidays Act 2003 — Minimum Wage Act 1983 — Wages Protection Act 1983 — Balahadia v R [2018] NZCA 483. The defendant appeared for sentence having pleaded guilty to three charges of exploitation under the Immigration Act 2009. In each case, she was charged as a party having aided and abetted her husband's exploitation of the same victim for failing to meet obligations under the Minimum Wage Act, Holidays Act and Wages Protection Act. The defendant was an immigration advisor and her husband operated a hairdressing salon. The victim was given a contract and employed to work in the salon. The contract stipulated that the victim would be paid $15 per hour with employment starting upon approval of a work visa. The victim was asked to complete a work visa application and the husband told him the defendant would complete the balance of the application and submit it. The victim started work the next day, was permitted to live in the salon (there was no mention of accommodation in the contract) and worked 120 days out of the 128 days, logging 1324 hours. At $15 per hour, that figure would equate to a $19,860 pre-tax wage. However, the total paid to the victim was just $2165. The defendant denied having control over any of the hairdressing business. The defendant sought a discharge without conviction but was declined. It was accepted the defendant had lesser culpability than her husband (who had a starting point for sentencing of 16 months' imprisonment, culminating in a sentence of five months' home detention) and was sentenced to four months' community detention, 100 hours' community work and reparations of $8,850 (being half the total reparations owed to the victim). Judgment Date: 17 May 2019.