In August 2020, Swanepoel allegedly sent two emails to the Companies Office saying the physical address of the pontoon Claydon had provided for his business was not a valid address.
Claydon went to police seeking a prosecution alleging Swanepoel had submitted a form using false claims.
Police declined to proceed with a prosecution so Claydon filed a private prosecution against Swanepoel in 2021, which, to date, has no trial date allocated.
In the charging document offence description, Claydon alleges Swanepoel made fictitious messages designed to disrupt his family business, waste his time and harass him and his family.
“He actually did harass myself and my family causing extreme stress and did disrupt our business causing significant loss,” the charging document states.
Initially, the District Court allowed the charge to proceed as a representative charge to which Swanepoel pleaded not guilty.
But in 2023, Judge Philip Rzepecky amended the charge to focus solely on two emails sent on August 24, 2020, and gave Claydon permission to file additional charges based on other alleged communications.
Claydon responded by submitting 20 new charges, ranging from further Telecommunications Act violations to allegations under the Crimes Act, Harassment Act, and Summary Offences Act.
These included claims of blackmail, fraud, harassment, and attempts to pervert the course of justice.
At a pre-trial hearing in September 2024, Judge Rzepecky ruled none of the new charges could be accepted for filing.
He found they were “fresh” charges and were not appropriately linked to the original incident.
Twelve of the charges were time-barred, falling outside the six-month limitation period.
The remaining eight were dismissed for lack of sufficient evidence to justify a trial.
Claydon appealed the decision, claiming the judge failed to consider his personal circumstances, including difficulty in particularising dates and details.
Justice David Johnstone rejected Claydon’s appeal and agreed, in a recently released decision, the 20 new charges were fresh allegations.
“Mr Claydon suggests he was taken by surprise by a police decision not to prosecute Mr Swanepoel, and for that reason acted reasonably in filing only one, broadly framed, charge,” Justice Johnstone said in his decision.
“As a prosecutor, however, Mr Claydon bears the responsibility of bringing proceedings correctly, in accordance with the CPA. His own circumstances at the time he elected to pursue a private prosecution are irrelevant to the circumstances of Mr Swanepoel’s alleged offences.”
With the appeal denied, Claydon is left with one original charge to prosecute which is scheduled for a pre-trial hearing in September.
Shannon Pitman is a Whangārei-based reporter for Open Justice covering courts in the Te Tai Tokerau region. She is of Ngāpuhi/ Ngāti Pūkenga descent and has worked in digital media for the past five years. She joined NZME in 2023.
