New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Assets forfeiture orders

Legal area

Court

30 May 2023

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v SMITH [2023] NZHC 1317

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1317
Court

High Court

The Court approved the settlement under s95 because it is consistent with the Act’s purpose and the overall interests of justice: the parties’ compromise (payment of $30,000 plus costs, release of specified assets from restraint and forfeiture of the payment and remaining restrained assets) is a pragmatic resolution that secures forfeiture without further costly litigation; the Court accepted the calculated unlawful benefit ($7,000,000) and maximum recoverable amount ($6,912,000) and that the respondent has effective control of the property to be realised.
11 Jun 2019

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v DE WYS [2019] NZHC 1300

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1300
Court

High Court

Because the restrained property was tainted property within the meaning of the Act and the statutory criteria of s50 were satisfied, the Court was required to make an assets forfeiture order in respect of the property recorded at paragraph 4 of the June 2014 Restraining Order; a profit forfeiture order could not be made in lieu and the respondents failed to demonstrate entitlement to any excess from sale.
20 May 2019

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v PARKES [2019] NZHC 1087

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1087
Court

High Court

The High Court will approve a s95 settlement if it is consistent with the Act's purposes and the overall interests of justice; applying that test, the settlement was approved because it forfeited the bulk of restrained assets consistent with the Act's aims, reflected prosecutorial strength regarding unlawful benefit, and presented a pragmatic conservation of time and public resources.
24 Apr 2018

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v ZHANG & CHEN [2018] NZHC 790

Citation

[2018] NZHC 790
Court

High Court

The Commissioner was the overall successful party because assets forfeiture orders were granted on the primary issue (11 Austin Road) and relief to Ling Bai was limited to her quantified contribution and a proportion of capital gain; accordingly costs were awarded to the Commissioner on a 2B basis apportioned 70% against Ling Bai and 30% against Sen Zhang, with fixed amounts ordered.
14 Mar 2018

COMMISSIONER OF NEW ZEALAND POLICE v WALLACE [2018] NZHC 439

Citation

[2018] NZHC 439
Court

High Court

On the balance of probabilities the Harley-Davidson and the Triumph were obtained, wholly or in part, with proceeds of Mr Wallace's significant criminal activity; therefore both are tainted property and an assets forfeiture order is mandatory under s50(1); the claimed proprietary interest of Ms Sim in the Harley-Davidson was not proved and relief is refused.
15 Dec 2017

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v GOOD [2017] NZHC 3145

Citation

[2017] NZHC 3145
Court

High Court

The Court approved the settlement because it was consistent with the purposes of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 — a significant asset will be sold and the majority of net proceeds forfeited to the Crown — and because approval was consistent with the overall interests of justice by resolving competing claims and achieving a cost‑effective outcome.
28 Mar 2017

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v UELE [2017] NZHC 574

Citation

[2017] NZHC 574
Court

High Court

The Court approved the settlement under s 95 because on a broad assessment the proposed terms (forfeiture of about 80% of restrained assets and return of $150,000 less legal aid debt) were consistent with the Act's purposes and the overall interests of justice when weighed against the strength of the Commissioner's case, litigation risk (including potential relief to the second respondent), family hardship and the saving of time and resources.
30 Jul 2010

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE V ADAM NELSON AND ORS HC AK CIV-2010-404-989

Citation

openlaw-3c8ed4f6_1937_4bdc_9fa6_0b529d581f55.pdf
Court

High Court

On the balance of probabilities the Court found the Holden Commodore AQT455 was tainted property because the $25,000 cash purchase was more likely to have derived from Adam Nelson's drug-dealing activity than from stated family funds; therefore an assets forfeiture order vested AQT455 in the Crown and Official Assignee. By contrast the Commissioner failed to prove HSV634 or Harley 58YTJ were tainted or that Kenneth Deer knowingly benefited from his brother's criminal activity, so forfeiture of those vehicles was dismissed. The Ford Falcon CGZ599 was more probably purchased with funds from the…