Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | News Video | Crime | Employers | Housing | Immigration | Legal | Local Govt. | Maori | Welfare | Unions | Youth | Search

 


Judgment: Kapa v R

[Full judgment: SC_114_2011__James_Kapa_v_R.pdf]


Supreme Court of New Zealand

20 December 2012

MEDIA RELEASE – FOR IMMEDIATE PUBLICATION

JAMES JOSEPH KAPA v THE QUEEN

(SC 114/2011)

[2012 ] NZSC 119

PRESS SUMMARY

This summary is provided to assist in the understanding of the Court’s judgment. It does not comprise part of the reasons for that judgment. The full judgment with reasons is the only authoritative document. The full text of the judgment and reasons can be found at www.courtsofnz.govt.nz.

On 2 December 2007 James Kapa, the appellant, and Ronald van Wakeren burgled the National Army Museum at Waiouru and stole 96 gallantry medals worth over $5 million. Two members of the public, Lord Ashcroft and Mr Tom Sturgess, offered a substantial award of up to $300,000 for the return of these medals. The Commissioner of Police administered the award. Messrs Kapa and van Wakeren handed over the medals anonymously, through their lawyer, to the Commissioner. In return, Mr Kapa received $100,000 and Mr van Wakeren received $100,000. Messrs Kapa and van Wakeren were eventually arrested for and charged with burglary of the museum. Both pleaded guilty. Mr van Wakeren repaid his share of the reward but Mr Kapa did not. The District Court Judge imposed on Mr Kapa both a sentence of imprisonment and a sentence of reparation of $100,000, being the reward amount that Mr Kapa received. The issue for the Supreme Court was whether Lord Ashcroft and Mr Sturgess, as the reward donors, were persons for whose benefit a sentence of reparation could be made under s 32 of the Sentencing Act 2002.

The Supreme Court has held, by a majority comprising Elias CJ, McGrath, William Young and Chambers JJ, that the donors of the reward were not persons for whose benefit a sentence of reparation could be made. Only victims, as defined in s 4 of the Sentencing Act, can be the recipients of a sentence of reparation under s 32(1). Specifically, a person who is not himself or herself a victim cannot recover for loss or damage consequential on a victim’s loss of or damage to property under s 32(1)(c). Reward donors do not, by their payments, make themselves victims. The loss suffered by reward donors cannot be considered direct loss under s 32(1)(a) or consequential loss under s 32(1)(c). Nor can the Commissioner of Police recover reward money by way of a sentence of reparation. The costs he incurs are part of his investigative expenses. However, it may be possible to recover the reward amount from Mr Kapa under the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009.

Glazebrook J dissents. She would have held that reward donors have suffered a direct loss under s 32(1)(a), if not consequential loss under s 32(1)(c).

In accordance with the views of the majority, the appeal is accordingly allowed and the sentence of reparation is quashed.


[Full judgment: SC_114_2011__James_Kapa_v_R.pdf]

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

 

Departure Speech: Governor-General’s State Farewell Luncheon

"...Unfortunately I was unable to get to the Antarctic, the Chatham Islands and the Kermadecs. A dicky heart thwarted our travel to the Antarctic; and even though I volunteered to parachute into the Kermadecs to join the Young Blake expedition, time, commitments and officials frustrated my plans to visit the Kermadecs and Chathams." More>>

ALSO:

New Research: Most Homeless People Working Or Studying

“The cost of housing has been rising without corresponding increases in income, whilst the number of state houses per capita has been in decline. Many low-income people are missing out on housing, whether we recognise them as ‘homeless’ or not. More>>

ALSO:

Post-Traynor: New Offender Info Sharing Plan

“This Bill delivers on that step-change by moving away from name-based records held by individual agencies to a shared, anchor identity based on unalterable information, such as fingerprints and facial recognition. It also gives agencies access to the drivers’ licence photo database and birth, death and marriages information." More>>

  • NZ Law Foundation - New $2M fund for research on information challenges
  • Littoral: New Ship To Deliver Enhanced Naval Capability

    Defence Minister Gerry Brownlee says the Government has approved a Ministry of Defence and New Zealand Defence Force recommendation to request tenders for a new naval ship to support littoral operations. More>>

    July:

    After King's Labour Snub: Māori Party And Kiingitanga To Work Together

    Māori Party Co-leaders Te Ururoa Flavell and Marama Fox met with Kiingitanga representatives in Wellington yesterday to discuss working together on key issues for the betterment of Māori. More>>

    ALSO:

    Waitangi Claim On Rehabilitation: The 'Justus' System For Māori Not Good Enough

    Closing statements at the Waitangi Tribunal case against Corrections called for immediate steps and a comprehensive review to address the high rate of Māori reoffending. More>>

    ALSO:

    Advice: PM Sets Rules For Ministers' Treatment Of Public Servants

    Prime Minister John Key has laid down the law about the way ministers and public servants should interact, saying ministers may not always like the advice they receive, but they must listen to it carefully, respectfully and professionally. More>>

    Gordon Campbell: On The Funding Changes In Special Needs Education, And Uber

    The plan to strip out the educational support for older “special needs” children in order to meet the existing shortfall in funding for special needs in early childhood education is so miserly and relentlessly stupid as to defy belief… More>>

    SPECIAL EDUCATION (& More):

    Online Learning Plans:

    Get More From Scoop

     

    LATEST HEADLINES

     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Politics
    Search Scoop  
     
     
    Powered by Vodafone
    NZ independent news