A v Police HC Auckland CRI 2009-004-9598

[2009] NZHC 1154

This case has been anonymized

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI 2009-004-9598

A

Applicant

v

POLICE

Respondent

Hearing:         1 September 2009

Appearances: P F Wicks for applicant

R Reed for respondent

Judgment:      1 September 2009

JUDGMENT OF ALLAN J

Solicitors:

P F Wicks, 29 Shortland St, Auckland

Crown Solicitor Auckland

A V POLICE HC AK CRI 2009-004-9598  1 September 2009

[1]      Mr A   faces charges of kidnapping and aggravated robbery upon which he has recently been committed for trial in this Court.  The first callover is fixed for

20  September  2009.    No  trial  date has  been  fixed  but  it  would  confidently be expected that he will not go to trial until about mid 2010.

[2]      The present application is for variation of bail to permit Mr A   to travel to the Czech Republic on business.   He is the owner of two businesses which are involved in trade with parties in the Czech Republic and it is necessary for him to go there from time to time in order to facilitate transactions involving the import of Czech goods into New Zealand.

[3]      Earlier  this  year,  a  similar  application  was  made  and  granted  over  the opposition  of  the  police.    Mr  A    duly  went  to  Europe  and  returned  in compliance with the conditions of the bail variation.  Since then Mr A   has been committed for trial in this Court.

[4]      Ms Reed indicates that the application is opposed but not with excessive vigour.  She submits that there is a flight risk, but that it cannot be characterised as high.  In my view that approach is realistic.  Mr A   is now a permanent resident of this country, living in a long term relationship with a New Zealand citizen;  they own a home together.   There is a significant equity in it.   Moreover, Mr A   operates substantial businesses here, which involve the importation of goods from the  Czech  Republic.    In  other  words,  there  is  a  great  deal  to  tie  him  to  this jurisdiction.

[5]      Mr A   has already demonstrated that he can be trusted to return at the time advised to the Court, because he has already complied with the terms of a similar variation granted earlier in the year as discussed above.

[6]      Accordingly, I am satisfied that the risk of flight is minimal and that it is appropriate to grant the application.  Accordingly, there will be orders that:

a)       The applicant’s passport be returned to Mr A   by the District Court at Auckland to enable him to  undertake  travel  out  of  New Zealand between 4 and 24 September 2009;

b)The condition of Mr A  ’s bail requiring him to reside at a named address  is  suspended  during  the  period  commencing  4  September

2009 and ending with the close of 24 September 2009.

c)        He is to resurrender his passport to the Registrar of the High Court at

Auckland by 4 pm on 25 September 2009.

C J Allan J