New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Restraining order variation

Legal area

Court

7 Jul 2023

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v HUNT [2023] NZHC 1773

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1773
Court

High Court

The Court approved the $200,000 settlement under s 95 because it is consistent with the Act's purposes and the overall interests of justice: it effects forfeiture of property derived from significant criminal activity (estimated at $264,000), provides finality and certainty, avoids delay and litigation risk, and includes a supervised mechanism by the Official Assignee for receipt and forfeiture of cleared funds with variation of the restraining order to permit securing a loan and removal of title restraint on payment.
23 May 2023

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v KRISHNAN [2023] NZHC 1207

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1207
Court

High Court

The Court approved the consent settlement under s 95 because it was consistent with the Act's purpose to forfeit property derived from crime and with the interests of justice: the respondent admitted unlawful benefit and had pleaded guilty, the settlement forfeits the full unlawful benefit, protects the innocent co‑owner by allowing a chance to raise funds by borrowing, and avoids further cost and delay.
16 Dec 2019

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v NICHOLLS [2019] NZHC 3328

Citation

[2019] NZHC 3328
Court

High Court

The Court approved the settlement because it was satisfied the agreement was consistent with the purposes of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 and the overall interests of justice under s95; accordingly it varied the restraining order for a limited period, ordered payment of $134,000 to the Official Assignee (vesting in the Crown), vested accrued interest in the Crown and ordered immediate forfeiture of the specified boat and trailer.
1 Aug 2017

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v MCRAE AND OTHERS [2017] NZHC 1811

Citation

[2017] NZHC 1811
Court

High Court

The Court approved the s95 settlement as consistent with the Act's purposes and the interests of justice, accepted that the settlement appropriately reflected litigation risk and costs, and ordered a variation of the restraining orders to permit sale or refinancing with funds to be paid to the Official Assignee; an assets forfeiture order shall lie in court to come into effect if the agreed $150,000 is not paid by the specified date; claims against the first and second respondents dismissed.
27 Nov 2013

THE COMMISSIONER, THE NEW ZEALAND POLICE v WILD &ORS [2013] NZHC 3142

Citation

[2013] NZHC 3142
Court

High Court

The vehicle was released because (1) two vehicles were necessary for the working rural family; (2) the vehicle's modest value (Turners valuation $10,000) and the existence of substantially larger restrained assets made the risk to forfeiture equity insignificant; and (3) the court could and did impose conditions to protect forfeiture interests, so variation of the restraining order was justified.
18 Dec 2009

THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL OF NEW ZEALAND V KEEFE AND ANOR HC NAP CIV 2009-441-0608

Citation

openlaw-ec486b1e_65d1_45d3_ac53_d7b0be245008.pdf
Court

High Court

The court held that the applicant's order nisi effectively vested her with administration responsibilities and that the court may, under s42(2)(e) Proceeds of Crime Act 1991, authorize payment from restrained assets of bona fide estate administration expenses and certain personal legal costs; accordingly specified invoices and reimbursements were to be paid from the restrained estate with allocated amounts treated as estate expenses and limited amounts debited to the applicant, while the request to reserve funds for anticipated future fees was declined but leave to apply was reserved.
14 Sept 2006

THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL OF NEW ZEALAND V STURGEON HC NEL CIV 2003 442 84

Citation

openlaw-9c8dd8a6_464c_46d5_834a_a010d2ad4eba.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court granted the amended application authorising an advance of up to $35,000 secured against the respondent's farm to meet legal costs but limited senior counsel's preparation time for the appeals to 20 hours at $297 per hour plus GST as the reasonable allowance; the nominee's retention of $10,000 as a fund for default interest was authorised as falling within s42(2)(d)/(e).

New Zealand Case Law

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v HUNT [2023] NZHC 1773

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v KRISHNAN [2023] NZHC 1207

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v NICHOLLS [2019] NZHC 3328

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v MCRAE AND OTHERS [2017] NZHC 1811

THE COMMISSIONER, THE NEW ZEALAND POLICE v WILD &ORS [2013] NZHC 3142

THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL OF NEW ZEALAND V KEEFE AND ANOR HC NAP CIV 2009-441-0608

THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL OF NEW ZEALAND V STURGEON HC NEL CIV 2003 442 84