Theft by procuring

This project urgently reviewed the law on dishonestly procuring valuable benefits. The Court of Appeal decision in R v Wilkinson (13 October 1998, CA 122/98) demonstrates that certain dishonest actions which constitute the offence of theft or obtaining by false pretence, if they result in payment being made to the accused by cash or cheque, are not offences if the mode of payment employed is a direct transfer of funds from one bank account to another.

Dishonestly Procuring Valuable Benefits (NZLC R51, 1998)

The Commission's Report, Dishonestly Procuring Valuable Benefits (NZLC R51, 1998) urgently reviews the law on dishonestly procuring valuable benefits. The Court of Appeal decision in R v Wilkinson (13 October 1998, CA 122/98) demonstrates that certain dishonest actions which constitute the offence of theft or obtaining by false pretence, if they result in payment being made to the accused by cash or cheque, are not offences if the mode of payment employed is a direct transfer of funds from one bank account to another.

Recommendations were reflected in the Crimes Amendment Act 2003. 

There was no requirement for the Government to present a formal response to Commission reports before April 2009.

See Official Government response process | Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC).