Hyde v Police

[2016] NZHC 2292

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CRI 2016-409-000086 [2016] NZHC 2292

BETWEEN

NATHAN LOUIS HYDE

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent

Hearing:	27 September 2016
Counsel:	No appearance by or on behalf of Appellant N A Pointer for Respondent
Judgment:	27 September 2016

(ORAL) JUDGMENT OF HEATH J

Solicitors:

Crown Solicitor, Christchurch
Copy to:

N L Hyde, Appellant

HYDE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2016] NZHC 2292 [27 September 2016]

[1]      Mr Hyde appeals against an order made by the District Court at Christchurch confiscating a motor vehicle.  The order was made following a plea of guilty being entered on 3 August 2016 by Mr Daniel Thomas, on a charge of operating a vehicle in an unauthorised street race.1

[2]      Mr Thomas has not challenged the sentence imposed.  Mr Hyde asserted that he was the owner of the vehicle.   He appealed on the grounds that confiscation would cause “undue hardship” to him.  That ground is available by virtue of s 129(4) of the Sentencing Act 2002.

[3]      Mr Hyde did not appear in support of the appeal when it was called this morning.  The Registrar contacted him.  He does not intend to appear.  He states that he no longer owns the vehicle.

[4]      In any event, there is no evidence before the Court of undue hardship on Mr Hyde’s behalf.  The question of whether transfer of the vehicle will affect any purchaser is something that will need to be considered in due course.

[5]      For present purposes, the appeal is dismissed.

P R Heath J

1      New Zealand Police v Thomas [2016] NZDC 15335 at paras [5] and [6].