New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Search and seizure

Legal area

Court

5 Sept 2023

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v ROYCE ALLAN DUNCAN [2023] NZHC 2482

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2482
Court

High Court

The Court granted leave because a profit forfeiture order creates an enforceable debt recoverable by the Official Assignee and the statutory scheme (s55(4), s83(4)) together with the Court of Appeal in Harrison permit the Official Assignee to recover by any lawful means regardless of whether the funds were specified at the time of the order; the provenance of the seized cash was therefore irrelevant and the circumstances of seizure (cash found with a pistol, drugs and paraphernalia) undermined the respondent's account.
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.
16 Jun 2023

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v AVERY & OR [2023] NZHC 1513

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1513
Court

High Court

Detective Forrest's affidavit provided sufficient admissible circumstantial evidence (large concealed cash sums, ESR drug results, encrypted communications, unexplained bank deposits and timing of communications) to establish on the balance of probabilities reasonable grounds that the listed items were tainted property and that the respondents unlawfully benefited from significant criminal activity; therefore interim restraining orders under the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 were warranted and the property was to be placed under the Official Assignee's custody pending further order.
9 May 2023

TAMIEFUNA v R [2023] NZCA 163

Citation

[2023] NZCA 163
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held that the police officer's taking and retention of close-up identification photographs during the traffic stop amounted to a 'search' for the purposes of s21 BORA and was unreasonable because it lacked statutory authorisation, was not in the context of an active investigation against the subject, and breached information privacy principles. Despite that impropriety the Evidence Act s30 balancing exercise favoured admission of the photographs because the intrusion was modest, the impropriety was not deliberate or in bad faith, and the evidence was important to an effective justic…
9 Mar 2023

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v SWARBRICK [2023] NZHC 430

Citation

[2023] NZHC 430
Court

High Court

Given the combination of physical evidence from the search, intercepted communications arranging drug sales, the denomination and location of cash, unexplained substantial cash deposits in the respondent's bank account, and the respondent's convictions for supply-related offences, it was more probable than not that the $25,305 was derived from supply of methamphetamine and/or cannabis and therefore constituted tainted property obliging the Court to make an assets forfeiture order under s50(1).
16 Nov 2022

TAIKATO v TAURANGA CITY COUNCIL [2022] NZHC 3004

Citation

[2022] NZHC 3004
Court

High Court

The appeal is dismissed: the attack established an ongoing risk of repeat harm, no exceptional circumstances under s57(3) were proved to avoid destruction, the warrant authorising seizure was valid and in any event its validity did not affect the charge arising from the 25 December 2021 attack, and the reparation and medical cost orders were appropriate and proportionate to the harm.
27 Sept 2022

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v ALLAH [2022] NZHC 2463

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2463
Court

High Court

On the balance of probabilities the seized cash was acquired as a result of, or derived from, the respondent's significant criminal activity and therefore constituted tainted property under s5 of the Act, entitling the Court to grant an asset forfeiture order under s50.
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.
23 Aug 2022

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v COLE [2022] NZHC 2095

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2095
Court

High Court

The judge was satisfied on the material that notice would risk disposal or concealment of the assets and would unduly prejudice enforcement; the affidavits gave reasonable grounds to believe the bank funds, vehicles and simulator were tainted or derived from significant criminal activity or represented unlawful benefit; accordingly the court properly exercised its discretion to grant restraining and further orders without notice and to prohibit publication identifying the respondents pending the on‑notice application.
10 Aug 2022

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v SWAN [2022] NZHC 1963

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1963
Court

High Court

On the balance of probabilities the Court found both sums of cash were derived from significant criminal activity (methamphetamine dealing) based on their association with drug indicia, links to the respondents by CCTV, forensic evidence, phone/text analysis, bank deposit patterns and prior guilty pleas; accordingly the cash constituted tainted property and an assets forfeiture order was mandatory under s50(1).