Nullity Sought For Police Resignation

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31907, 7 February 1969, Page 20

Nullity Sought For Police Resignation

(New Zealand Press Association) AUCKLAND, February 6. Mr Justice Moller today reserved his decision in a claim brought by Trevor Thomas Patrick Martin against the Commissioner of Police, George Colin Urquhart, and the former commissioner, Carl Leslie Spencer. His Honour said he hoped to be able to give his decision tomorrow.

Mr Martin, a storeman, of Auckland, is seeking a declaration that his resignation from the New Zealand Police was a nullity.

Mr P. A. Williams appeared for Mr Martin and the two commissioners were represented by Mr D. S. Morris. In his statement of claim, Mr Martin said he had served

in the police from 1956, rising to the rank of detective constable.

On April 4, 1966, at the Otahuhu Magistrate's Court he was convicted for assault of a burglary suspect. On April 13, 1966. he was told that Mr Spencer would dismiss him from the police at 2.30 p.m. that day unless telephoned advice of his resignation was received in Wellington by that time.

As a result of the ultimatum, Mr Martin said he resigned. In September, 1966, his conviction was quashed on appeal and he applied to Mr Spencer for reinstatement, but his application was re- . fused. A further application made after Mr Urquhart became commissioner in 1967 was also refused. Wrongfully Induced Mr Martin claims that as a result of the ultimatum he was wrongfully induced to resign and thereby deprived himself of right of appeal. He seeks a declaration that the resignation was a nullity and for an order setting it aside and reinstating him to l the police. He also seeks such relief as the Court deems just and the costs of the action. For a further or alternative cause of action he claims that the ultimatum constituted an imoroper exercise of power vested in the commissioner and that the commissioner unlawfuly achieved his exclusion from the New Zealand polie" without a hearing or right of appeal. And for a further or alternative cause of action he

claims that the quashed conviction was not the true reason for the ultimatum. He claims that he is being refused reinstatement on grounds unknown to him. The defence admits that Mr Martin served in the police force and was convicted on April 4, 1966. The defence denies the other allegations and says Mr Martin voluntarily resigned from the police, and his resignation was accepted.