Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of New Zealand Decisions

R v Zhang [2022] NZHC 2540 (5 October 2022)

Last Updated: 5 October 2022

VERDICTS OF GAULT J

R v ZHANG [2022] NZHC 2540 [5 October 2022]

• [1] The purpose of this hearing is to deliver my verdicts in open court.

• [2] Following investigations by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) into political party donations to the National Party and the Labour Party, the Crown alleges that the defendants adopted a fraudulent device, trick, or stratagem to deceive by providing sham names of purported donors below the $15,000 disclosure threshold in the Electoral Act 1993, amounting to an offence of obtaining by deception under s 240(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1961, as follows:

(a) Mr Yikun Zhang (Mr Zhang), Mr Shijia (Colin) Zheng (Mr Colin Zheng), Mr Hengjia (Joe) Zheng (Mr Joe Zheng), C, H and W1 face two alternative charges of obtaining by deception in relation to a payment of $60,000 to the Labour Party in March 2017 for the purchase of five paintings, which amounted to a donation of $34,840 after deducting the value of the paintings;

(b) Mr Jami-Lee Ross (Mr Ross), Mr Zhang and Mr Colin Zheng face two alternative charges of obtaining by deception in relation to a donation of $100,000 made to the National Party in June 2017; and

(c) Mr Ross, Mr Zhang, Mr Colin Zheng and Mr Joe Zheng face two alternative charges of obtaining by deception in relation to a donation of $100,050 made to the National Party in June 2018.

• [3] In each case, the Crown case under s 240(1)(a) is based on obtaining a “benefit”. The alternative charges allege a different benefit – either the Party’s possession of the donation or the true donor’s freedom from public scrutiny.

• [4] Mr Joe Zheng also faces a charge of supplying false or misleading information to the SFO under s 45(a) and (d) of the Serious Fraud Office Act 1990 (SFO Act).

1. Where the defendants and others of Chinese origin use anglicised names with surname last, I do the same for consistency and meaning no disrespect.

• [5] The trial proceeded as a Judge-alone trial and I reserved my decision.

• [6] I am required to give reasons for my verdicts.2 Rather than reading at length, the reasons will be made available immediately following this hearing.

• [7] Will the defendants please stand.

• [8] I return the following verdicts:

2. Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 106(2). See Sena v New Zealand Police [2019] NZSC 55, [2019] 1 NZLR 575 at [17]- [18], citing R v Connell [1985] NZCA 34; [1985] 2 NZLR 233 (CA) at 237-238 and R v Eide [2004] NZCA 215; [2005] 2 NZLR 504 (CA) at [20]- [21].

• [9] Having conferred with counsel, I enter convictions in respect of each of the guilty verdicts and acquittals in respect of each of the not guilty verdicts.

• [10] Mr Zhang, Mr Colin Zheng and Mr Joe Zheng are remanded for sentencing on Wednesday 30 November 2022 at 9:00 am. I direct the provision of pre-sentence reports with appendices.

• [11] Mr Wicks accepted that it is appropriate for bail to continue on existing terms until sentencing (including surrender of passports and not applying for travel documents). He acknowledged that in terms of s 13 of the Bail Act 2000, a non- custodial sentence is possible. I am satisfied it is in the interests of justice for bail to

continue on existing terms until sentencing. Mr Zhang, Mr Colin Zheng and Mr Joe Zheng are remanded on bail on existing terms until Wednesday 30 November 2022 at 9:00 am.

• [12] C, H and W and two connected parties had interim name suppression until verdicts. They have signalled applications for permanent name suppression. Any applications are to be filed and served – including on the media through Mr Stewart – by 11 October 2022. I extend their interim name suppression pending hearing of any such applications.

• [13] Any request to redact private information from the public version of my reasons judgment is to be made within three hours given judgment distribution timing.

Gault J

Solicitors / Counsel:

Mr P Wicks KC, Mr J Dixon KC and Ms K Hogan, Barristers, Auckland Ms K Bannister and Ms H Moore-Savage, Serious Fraud Office, Auckland Mr J Katz KC, Ms L Lindsay and Ms N Small, Barristers, Auckland

Mr D Courtney (Mr Zhang’s instructing solicitor), Courtney & Co, Auckland

Mr B A Keown, Ms Z Farquhar and Mr D Scholes (for Mr Zhang), Bell Gully, Auckland Mr P Dacre KC and Ms W Andrews, Barristers, Auckland

Ms R L Thomson and Mr A Young, Barristers, Auckland

Ms J Pidgeon (Mr H Zheng and Mr S Zheng’s instructing solicitor), Pidgeon Judd Ltd, Auckland Mr S Lowery and Mr J Suyker, Barristers, Auckland

Mr X Zhang (C’s instructing solicitor), Zhang Law, Auckland Mr M Corlett KC, Barrister, Auckland

Mr S McArley (H’s instructing solicitor), Solicitor, Auckland

Mr SNB Wimsett and Ms Y Y Mortimer-Wang, Barristers, Auckland Mr R M Mansfield KC and Ms H C Stuart, Barristers, Auckland

Mr C Hocquard (Mr Ross’s instructing solicitor), Dominion Law, Auckland