Commissioner of Police v Matthews

[2022] NZHC 86

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PALMERSTON NORTH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA

TE PAPAIOEA ROHE

CIV-2020-454-71

[2022] NZHC 86

UNDER

the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009

IN THE MATTER OF

an application under ss 21, 24, 25, 35, 58 and

80

BETWEEN

THE COMMISSIONER, THE NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Applicant

AND

CRAIG WAYNE MATTHEWS

Respondent

AND

BRITTANY NATALIE ROSLYN MORGAN

First Interested Party

TINOROA AARON MATHEW HORUA-TIMOTI

Second Interested Party

Continued…

On the Papers
Judgment:	3 February 2022

JUDGMENT OF GWYN J

Solicitors:

BVA The Practice, Palmerston North Ms Goodlet, Wanganui

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v MATTHEWS [2022] NZHC 86 [3 February 2022]

AND

MICHAEL TAMARAPA

Third Interested Party

WAYNE SELWYN DESMOND MATTHEWS
Fourth Interested Party

TOMAIRANGI HENARE HOEFT
Fifth Interested Party

NEVILL SHANE HUGHES

Sixth Interested Party

[1]                 The Commissioner of Police (Commissioner) has sought restraining and further orders under ss 21, 24, 25, 35, 58 and 80 of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (the Act).

[2]                 The application was made on notice on 15 November 2021 and supported by affidavits from Ashley Dewinton-Davies, dated 29 October 2021 and Detective Sergeant Nicola Holroyd, dated 23 December 2020.

[3]The assets sought to be restrained are:

(a)A black 2014 Harley Davidson Muscle Rod, including ignition keys, registration plate B9UPS, registered in the name of the fifth interested party (Tomairangi Hoeft) but under the effective control of the respondent (the 2014 Harley Davidson).

(b)A black 2018 Harley Davidson 17 Pro St Breakout, including ignition keys, registration plate B7PJD, registered in the name of the sixth interested party (Nevill Hughes) but under the effective control of the respondent (the 2018 Harley Davidson).

(the property)

[4]                 Counsel’s memorandum advises that the fifth and sixth interested parties have not taken any steps in the proceeding asserting an interest in the property.

[5]                 Counsel for the Commissioner and the Respondent have filed a joint memorandum, dated 1 February 2022, asking the Court to make the orders sought by consent, on the papers.

[6]                 Although the orders are sought by consent, s 25 of the Act requires that the Court must be “satisfied it has reasonable grounds to believe that the respondent has unlawfully benefited from significant criminal activity”.

[7]                 I have considered the application and the affidavits filed in support and I am satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the respondent has

unlawfully benefited from significant criminal activity (being supply of methamphetamine, an offence under s 5 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975) and that he has an interest in the property.

[8]                 I am also satisfied that the further orders sought are appropriate to ensure the value of the property is preserved and not dissipated and that the Official Assignee’s office can ensure effective enforcement of the restraining orders.

[9]                 Accordingly, I make the orders sought at [1(a)-(e)] in the Commissioner’s On Notice Application for Restraining and Further Orders, dated 15 November 2021.

[10]              The call of this matter scheduled for 8 February 2022 is vacated and appearances excused.

Gwyn J