Commissioner of Police v Cribbett

Case

[2022] NZHC 3345

12 December 2022

No judgment structure available for this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CIV-2022-409-000249

[2022] NZHC 3345

UNDER the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009

IN THE MATTER

of an application pursuant to ss 43, 44, 52 to 55 of the Act

BETWEEN

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Applicant

AND

KATHY EMILY CRIBBETT

Respondent

AND

MORTGAGE HOLDING TRUST COMPANY LIMITED

First Interested Party

AND

DARRIN BAYLIS

Third Interested Party

AND

DARRIN STEPHEN BAYLIS and CAMBRIDGE TRUSTEES NO 2 LIMITED

as Trustees of the BAYLIS FAMILY TRUST Fourth Interested Party

Hearing: On the papers

Counsel:

K South for the Applicant

C M Ruane for the Respondent
G M Brodie for the Second Interested Party

Judgment:

12 December 2022


JUDGMENT OF NATION J


POLICE v CRIBBETT [2022] NZHC 3345 [12 December 2022]

[1]                 As foreshadowed at the callover before Mander J on 5 December 2021, the parties have been exchanging evidence and exploring means of simplifying the proceedings. As a result, the Commissioner has filed a notice of request to amend the application for civil forfeiture orders.

[2]                 Peter Cribbett was previously included as a second interested party. The Commissioner’s application against the respondent related to a property which was in the respondent’s name but in which Mr Cribbett claimed to have an interest. Since the commencement of the proceedings, Mr Cribbett provided evidence showing he was in fact the beneficial owner of the property, despite the title stating otherwise.

[3]                 In the meantime, the third interested party has filed affidavit evidence in separate forfeiture proceedings acknowledging that Ms Cribbett has a valid relationship property interest in relation to three properties that were in his name as a result of his former de facto relationship with Ms Cribbett.

[4]                 The relevant parties have concurred that the issues to be determined in the proceedings involving Ms Cribbett can be appropriately streamlined, such that the Commissioner can reframe his application for forfeiture against Ms Cribbett so the application is instead parasitic on the Baylis properties.

[5]                 On that basis, the Commissioner consents to an order releasing 72A Frankleigh Street from restraint and striking Mr Peter Cribbett from the proceedings.

[6]                 Mr Baylis and his Family Trust are to be joined to the proceeding against Ms Cribbett as the third and fourth interested parties, as they also have an interest in the Baylis properties.

[7]                 The relevant parties acknowledge that the necessary evidence, justifying an amendment to an application for a civil forfeiture order to include additional property, has emerged only after the application for the civil forfeiture order was initially made.

[8]                 Against that background, counsel for the Commissioner, Ms Cribbett, Mr Peter Cribbett and for Mr Baylis have signed a memorandum consenting to the orders sought.

[9]The Court accordingly makes orders by consent:

(a)        releasing 72A Frankleigh Street from restraint and striking Mr Peter Cribbett from the proceedings;

(b)       joining Darrin Baylis and his Family Trust to this proceeding as the third and fourth interested parties; and

(c)        permitting the Commissioner to file the amended application for profit forfeiture order as provided to the Court on 9 December 2022.

[10]              The parties have not been able to settle a new timetable for final evidence given counsels trial commitments and new information having been provided by Ms Cribbett only very recently.

[11]              The proceedings are accordingly adjourned for call in the list at 11.45 am on 13 February 2023.

[12]              All counsel in these proceedings are to file a joint memorandum with the Court before then setting out the timetable for the filing of evidence and any further steps to be taken for the proceedings to be set down for trial.

Solicitors:

Raymond Donnelly & Co., Christchurch CM Ruane, Barrister, Christchurch

GM Brodie, Barrister, Christchurch.

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0