Ruan v Police - [2025] NZHC 1561

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2025-404-000056

[2025] NZHC 1561

BETWEEN
ZHEN RUAN

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 9 June 2025

Counsel:

C Chen for Appellant

L S Seybold for Respondent

Judgment:

13 June 2025

JUDGMENT OF BREWER J

This judgment was delivered by me on 13 June 2025 at 12 noon

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors/Respondent:
CJ Legal Ltd (Auckland) for Appellant
Meredith Connell (Auckland) for Respondent

RUAN v POLICE [2025] NZHC 1561 [13 June 2025]

Introduction

[1] Mr Ruan appeals convictions imposed by Judge A M Manuel on 5 September 2024.1 The charges were:

(a)failing to provide a police officer with his address as required;2 and

(b)resisting arrest.3

[2]The grounds of appeal are:

a)The arrest was unlawful, rendering the resisting charge invalid;

b)Excessive force was used during the arrest; and

c)The defendant’s language barrier, environment, and confusion were disregarded.

[3] I must allow Mr Ruan’s appeals if, for any reason, a miscarriage of justice has occurred.4

The Judge’s decision

[4]The Judge set out the background:

[1] On the evening of 22 September 2023, the defendant, Mr Ruan, was riding his motorbike home along New North Road. It was close to 7.30 pm. His evening was about to go wrong.

[2] He was stopped by police officers in a marked police car. They said he was stopped because he was speeding. This led to an infringement notice being issued, in respect of which the defendant later requested a hearing.

[3] After he was stopped, he was asked to provide certain information under s 114 of the Land Transport Act 1998. He declined to provide his address. He acknowledged in evidence that this request was made, but he told the police that they should have his address in their records already. Their response was that they needed up-to-date details so that they could send the infringement notice to him at the correct address.

[4] The officer continued to insist that he provide his address. The defendant continued to decline to give it.

1      Police v Ruan [2024] NZDC 25397.
2      Land Transport Act 1998 (LTA), s 52A(1)(c).
3      Summary Offences Act 1981, s 23(a).
4      Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 232.

[5] The officer told him he would be arrested if he did not, and that is what in fact happened. Mr Ruan was arrested. That gave rise to the first charge against him, which is one of being the driver of a vehicle stopped under the Land Transport Act 1998 (LTA) and, having a lawful demand by an enforcement officer to give full address, failed or refused to give such information. The charge is laid under s 52A(l)(c) of the LTA and has a maximum penalty of $1,000 fine.

[6] The second charge the defendant is facing is one of resisting arrest. This is laid under s 23(a) of the Summary Offences Act 1981 (SOA) and has a maximum penalty of three months in prison or a…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Ruan v Police and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] NZHC 1561
Decision Date: 13 June 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Zhen Ruan appeals against his convictions on two charges: failing to provide his address when required by a police officer and resisting arrest. The appeal is heard by Brewer J. The appeal is based on three grounds: the arrest was unlawful; excessive force was used during the arrest; and the defendant’s language barrier, environment, and confusion were disregarded. The appeal is considered on the basis that the appeal will only be allowed if a miscarriage of justice has occurred.

The first charge, failing to provide his address, was based on a request by the arresting officer under s 114 of the Land Transport Act 1998 (LTA). The arresting officer warned the defendant that he would be arrested if he did not provide his address. The defendant declined to provide his address, claiming the police should already have his address in their records. The evidence showed that the defendant was asked for his address and refused to provide it. The appeal against this conviction fails because the offence charged was failing to provide his address, and the circumstances of the arrest did not change that.

The second charge, resisting arrest, is based on s 23 of the Summary Offences Act 1981 (SOA). The defendant claimed that he did not resist arrest and was taken by surprise. The evidence of the police officers was that the defendant resisted arrest. The CCTV footage shows the defendant pulling away from the arresting officer and then both men falling to the ground. The footage corroborates the evidence of the police officers. The appeal against conviction on the charge of resisting arrest fails because the evidence supports the conclusion that the defendant resisted arrest.

The appeal against both convictions is dismissed.

Orders