The High Court has struck out a Northlander's claim against police and the Serious Fraud Office over their alleged failures to carry out their duties relating to a number of events.
Carl Butcher initiated judicial review proceedings over alleged failure of the police and the SFO to investigate or prosecute allegedly fraudulent or unlawful steps taken during the liquidation of Dragon Flyte Farms Limited near Dargaville.
Butcher and his then wife were 30 per cent shareholders, and her parents, Robert and Alison Burgess, owned the remaining shares.
He also claimed police failed to respond appropriately to alleged incidents of threatening or violent behaviour against him and members of his family, which he reported in 2009 and 2010.
In February 2010, the Burgesses and the Butchers signed a shareholders' resolution to put Dragon Flyte into liquidation, but in September 2010 the Butchers filed an application seeking a declaration that the liquidators had not been validly appointed and sought further directions about the conduct of the liquidation.
The High Court appointed alternative liquidators before it ruled the original liquidators had been validly appointed.
The court also ruled the liquidators were entitled to sell the company property at Trounson Park Rd as it was a wholly owned asset of the farm company and that the Butchers had no interest in the land.
In July 2013, the court refused an application by Carl Butcher for leave to commence a proceeding applying for an order terminating the liquidation of Dragon Flyte.
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
Butcher's complaints against police were over incidents that happened in 2009 and 2010.
He alleged Dargaville police were "under (the) instruction of a gang leader to not respond to 111 calls for help" by him or his family, in advance of an orchestrated attack on him at his home.
Police investigated the matter initially but decided no further action was warranted.
In April 2010, Butcher made a complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Authority relating to police failure to investigate another incident but the IPCA concluded the investigation was appropriate and that no further action was justified.
"It is for the Commissioner of Police and not the courts to make decisions about the way in which police resources are employed, bearing in mind that a balanced approach to the use of limited resources is required," Justice Kit Toogood said while striking out Butcher's claim.
"A conscious decision by the police not to investigate or not to undertake further investigation in response to the complaint does not amount to a refusal or failure by the police to carry out their duty."
Justice Toogood said although the courts were open to reviewing the way in which the police made investigative decisions, the court would not order the police to commence an investigation or further investigate a matter which has been the subject of an inquiry.