Lincoln v Attorney-General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CIV-2017-409-76

[2020] NZHC 134

UNDER the Bill of Rights Act 1990

IN THE MATTER

of a claim in tort and breach of s 27 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act

BETWEEN

RICHARD LINCOLN

Plaintiff

AND

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

Defendant

Hearing: 10-14 February 2020

Counsel:

Plaintiff in person

K South and C White for Defendant

Judgment:

11 February 2020

ORAL JUDGMENT (NO. 3) OF CHURCHMAN J

[1] Over the afternoon/evening adjournment in this matter, the parties have made progress. It has now been agreed between the parties that certain causes of action in these proceedings are no longer being proceeded with and the schedules to the statement of claim are also no longer in issue.

[2]Both counsel have confirmed to me that as a result of a payment of the sum of

$10,795, which is accepted as being the value of the firearms, accessories and ammunition seized, that the plaintiff now abandons cause of action 12 (which relates to a claim of misfeasance in a public office) and cause of action 14 (which relates to trespass and conversion).

LINCOLN v ATTORNEY-GENERAL (NO. 3) [2020] NZHC 134 [11 February 2020]

[3] In addition to those causes of action being deleted, the parties have agreed that schedules A and B to the third amended statement of claim are now no longer relevant.

Churchman J

Solicitors:
Raymond Donnelly & Co, Christchurch for Defendant cc: R Lincoln

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Lincoln v Attorney-General before the High Court of New Zealand in Christchurch involved the plaintiff, Richard Lincoln, asserting claims in tort and alleging a breach of section 27 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. The defendant was the Attorney-General, representing the state. Lincoln's claims included allegations of misfeasance in a public office, trespass, and conversion concerning firearms, accessories, and ammunition seized by law enforcement.

The central legal issues in this case revolved around whether Lincoln's claims of misfeasance in a public office and trespass/conversion were valid. The court needed to determine if the actions of the state in seizing the plaintiff's property were justified and whether they breached the protections guaranteed under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.

In its reasoning, the court accepted the parties' agreement that Lincoln would abandon his claims of misfeasance in a public office and trespass/conversion in exchange for a payment of $10,795, which represented the value of the seized items. The court also noted that schedules A and B to the third amended statement of claim were no longer relevant to the proceedings. Consequently, the court dismissed the remaining claims, effectively concluding that the actions of the state did not constitute a breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.

The final orders of the court reflected the resolution of the claims, with the court dismissing the remaining proceedings following the settlement agreement and the parties' agreement on the irrelevance of certain schedules to the statement of claim.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

UNDER	the Bill of Rights Act 1990
IN THE MATTER	of a claim in tort and breach of s 27 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act
BETWEEN	RICHARD LINCOLN Plaintiff
AND	ATTORNEY-GENERAL Defendant