New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Proceeds of crime

Legal area

Court

23 Jun 2023

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v BAYLEY [2023] NZHC 1571

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1571
Court

High Court

The Court approved the s95 settlement because it was consistent with the purposes of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act and the overall interests of justice: it ensured forfeiture of property derived from significant criminal activity, repaid the Ministry of Social Development from the seized funds, reduced litigation risk and provided finality, despite the underlying search later found unlawful because the respondent consented to the forfeiture.
2 Sept 2022

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v BIRD [2022] NZHC 2241

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2241
Court

High Court

The Court was satisfied on reasonable grounds that the assets were tainted property because the respondent had engaged in significant criminal activity, there were unexplained funds and cash linked to property renovations and bank transactions, and there was a real risk of disposal or concealment if notice were given; accordingly without‑notice restraining orders under s24 were appropriate and granted.
28 Jul 2022

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v DEVERELL [2022] NZHC 1839

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1839
Court

High Court

The court was satisfied on the material before it that there were reasonable grounds to believe the respondents had unlawfully benefited from criminal activity, that they had interests in the property sought to be restrained, and that there was a risk of disposal if notice were given; accordingly, and because s 34 authorised entry and seizure by Police and Official Assignee staff to enable statutory functions, the interim restraining orders and the s 34 entry/seizure order were properly granted.
6 May 2022

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v TAMIHANA [2022] NZHC 955

Citation

[2022] NZHC 955
Court

High Court

On the balance of probabilities the Court was satisfied that the identified property was directly or indirectly derived from the first respondent's large-scale methamphetamine supply and that Whitby Place was purchased and held beneficially for the first respondent (despite legal title in Mr Allison). Therefore the property was 'tainted property' within the meaning of the Act and an assets forfeiture order was mandatory under s50, vesting the listed property in the Crown and placing it in the custody and control of the Official Assignee.
26 Jan 2022

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v STANDEN [2022] NZHC 42

Citation

[2022] NZHC 42
Court

High Court

On the affidavit evidence the Court was satisfied there were reasonable grounds to believe the respondent unlawfully benefited from significant criminal activity and that there was a real risk of disposal or concealment if notice were given; accordingly a restraining order under s25 was justified and the identified vehicles were ordered to be restrained and placed in the Official Assignee's custody and control.
11 Oct 2021

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v WONG [2021] NZHC 2713

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2713
Court

High Court

The Court approved the parties' settlement because it was consistent with the Act's purposes and the overall interests of justice: it saved time and cost, reflected the litigation risks and strength of the Commissioner's case, and proportionately recognised the limited involvement of the interested third party by returning $55,000 while forfeiting remaining restrained funds to the Crown.
12 Aug 2021

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v LE [2021] NZHC 2085

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2085
Court

High Court

The Court approved the s95 settlement as consistent with the Act and interests of justice, extended the restraining order over 58 Fairburn Road for one year, ordered the Official Assignee to sell Fairburn Road and apply proceeds as specified (costs, loan repayment, $500,000 settlement sum to forfeit, balance returned), and made assets forfeiture orders vesting specified assets of the named respondents in the Crown after finding the property tainted on the balance of probabilities.
25 Jun 2021

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v SALTER [2021] NZHC 1531

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1531
Court

High Court

On the facts, the Court exercised its s 29 discretion to require the Commissioner to give an undertaking as to damages and costs because restraining orders over integral business property of a holistically operated commercial group were likely, over a multi-year restraint (likely at least three years), to impair significant transactions (sale or major borrowing) and cause objectively foreseeable commercial loss; an undertaking is proportionate, provides an effective remedy, and will not unduly chill law enforcement.
9 Jun 2021

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v MCKENZIE [2021] NZHC 1351

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1351
Court

High Court

The Court approved the parties' consent settlement because it was consistent with the purposes of the Act and the overall interests of justice given the strength of the Commissioner's case on the available evidence, the respondent's acknowledgements of weaknesses, and the public and private interest in certainty and conserving resources; accordingly a profit forfeiture order for $80,966.16 was made and the remaining restrained sale proceeds were released to the respondent.
8 Jun 2020

SMITH v R [2020] NZCA 221

Citation

[2020] NZCA 221
Court

Court of Appeal

The extension of time to appeal is declined because the proposed appeal lacks merit: under Zhang the starting point and role assessment for 15 kg of methamphetamine (upper-end significant/leading role) justified the sentence structure, the discounts for addiction, remorse and guilty plea were appropriate, and a 50% minimum period of imprisonment was warranted for very substantial commercial dealing.