Disqualification is not a foregone conclusion.

New Zealand sets two alcohol limits depending on who is behind the wheel. The general limit for drivers aged 20 and over is 250 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath — the 0.05% blood alcohol level — while drivers under 20 are on zero tolerance, meaning no alcohol at all. The police also have the power to run random roadside breath tests, so no driving error is needed for a reading to be taken.

The breath reading then decides which track you are on. Since 2014, a result above 250 but not exceeding 400 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath is dealt with by infringement notice rather than prosecution — 50 demerit points and a fine, but no conviction. Blow over 400 micrograms and the police prosecute; the usual outcome on conviction is a six-month disqualification and a fine. Separately, at high readings — over 650 micrograms of breath or 130 milligrams of blood, with lower thresholds for recent repeat offenders — the police can impose an immediate 28-day licence suspension at the roadside under section 95.

Conviction brings the familiar range of penalties: fines, disqualification running from months to years depending on severity, and imprisonment at the high-level or repeat end, with each subsequent offence treated progressively more harshly. Thousands of convictions are entered every year — few charges bring more ordinary New Zealanders before the courts, and whether the police followed the required procedure to the letter is often where the real argument lies.

A Limited Licence — most people call it a work licence — is an order of the District Court under sections 103 to 105 of the Land Transport Act 1998 allowing you to drive for a defined purpose while disqualified or suspended, on conditions such as driving only within set hours. For a court-imposed disqualification, a 28-day stand-down applies before the Court will take the application, and you cannot drive at all during it; demerit-point suspensions use the same process with no stand-down.

The heart of the application is hardship. You need to show that being unable to drive will cause extreme hardship to you — losing your job is the classic case — or undue hardship to someone else, such as an employer or a family member who depends on you. The Court also has to be satisfied that the driving sought is a genuine reduction on what you did before, and that granting the order is not against the public interest. Not everyone can apply: two qualifying driving offences within five years, a disqualification imposed for driving while disqualified, certain transport-service offences or an indefinite disqualification all close the door.

These applications are won on preparation. Two affidavits are usually needed — yours and your employer's — filed ahead of the hearing with a draft order and map, and the common failure points are predictable: asking for more driving than the Court will countenance, a lukewarm employer affidavit, or a home-to-work application where public transport is a realistic answer. Get the planning right and the sealed order goes to an approved provider with form DL 15, with the NZ Transport Agency taking around four working days to issue the temporary licence.

Section 94 of the Land Transport Act 1998 gives the District Court a power most drivers have never heard of: in defined circumstances it can order community work or supervision in place of a mandatory disqualification. Courts use it where stacking another disqualification on top of earlier ones would do disproportionate damage — costing someone their job, or breaking a family's caregiving arrangements.

The gateway has two parts. You must have been disqualified before — once is enough — and the Court must be persuaded that a further disqualification would be inappropriate, weighing the offence, how effective earlier disqualifications actually were, the personal fallout of another one, the public interest and whether a community-based sentence fits better. Importantly, Timbrell v NZ Police [2018] confirmed the section is not reserved for drivers trapped in a repeating cycle of losing their licence — it can apply wherever substitution is just and appropriate, which opens it up on a second offence.

It is a narrow power with firm exclusions: it is not available for a first disqualification, nor where sections 63 or 65 apply (s65 imposes mandatory indefinite disqualification on certain repeat alcohol or drug offenders), where an alcohol interlock sentence has been ordered under section 65AC, or where the section 103 Limited Licence bar operates. The application itself is made at sentencing, on a guilty plea or conviction, and it stands or falls on the affidavit evidence of hardship — so confirming the exclusions do not bite, then building that evidence properly, is the first job on any s94 file.

A traffic conviction keeps turning up long after the sentence is done — on job applications, insurance forms and credit applications. The Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act 2004 exists for exactly that problem: once you qualify, you no longer have to disclose the eligible convictions in most everyday situations. There is no application and no discretion involved — the clean slate applies automatically to everyone who meets the criteria.

Qualifying means meeting every one of four tests: the conviction is not for a specified offence — certain sexual offences are permanently excluded from the scheme; seven clear years have passed without any new conviction; no custodial sentence was ever imposed for the convictions in question; and every sentence and fine attached to them has been completed. Miss any one of the four and the disclosure obligations remain.

The exceptions do the real damage. Disclosure is still required for roles working with children or vulnerable people, in certain immigration processes, and wherever another law specifically demands it — including some professional licences. In our experience the hard questions are rarely about the four criteria and almost always about whether an exception catches the particular form in front of you. Answering wrongly in either direction carries consequences, so take advice before the form goes in.