Commissioner of Police v Mauga

[2015] NZHC 1071

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV-2015-404-862 [2015] NZHC 1071

UNDER

the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act

2009

BETWEEN

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Applicant

AND

TILI MAUGA Respondent

Hearing:	On the papers
Appearances:	G E Hughes for Applicant
Judgment:	20 May 2015

JUDGMENT OF LANG J

[on application for assets forfeiture order]

This judgment was delivered by me on 20 May 2015 at 3 pm, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Date……………

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v MAUGA [2015] NZHC 1071 [20 May 2015]

[1]      In this proceeding the Commissioner of Police (the Commissioner) seeks an assets forfeiture order under s 50(1) of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (the Act) in respect of a quantity of cash found by the police at a residential address in Otara.  Mr Mauga was the occupier of that address at the time the cash was found.

[2]      Mr Mauga  provided  his  lawyers  with  authority to  accept  service  of this proceeding on his behalf.  The proceeding was duly served on his lawyers, but they have no current instructions to impose the Commissioner’s application.  Mr Mauga has apparently indicated through his counsel that he does not wish to contest the Commissioner’s application for an order that the cash be forfeited.  For that reason the application proceeds by way of formal proof based on the affidavit filed in support of the application.

[3]      The affidavit reveals that on 16 January 2014, the police executed a search warrant at Mr Mauga’s address.   There they located approximately 359 grams of cannabis,  4.7  grams  of  methamphetamine  and  cash  totalling  $21,120.00.    On

31 October 2014, Mr Mauga pleaded guilty in the Manukau District Court to a charge of being in possession of cannabis for supply.  On 5 December 2014, he was sentenced to seven months home detention and 225 hours community work on this charge.

[4]      The evidence contained in the affidavit filed in support of the application satisfies me that the cash found at Mr Mauga’s address is likely to be the product of drug dealing activity.  It is therefore tainted property in terms of s 50(1) of the Act. On that basis the Court is required to make the assets forfeiture order sought by the

Commissioner.  I make an order accordingly.

Lang J

Solicitors:

Crown Solicitor, Auckland

Copy to: Respondent