Mostra notizie nelle discussioni
  • Avatar
    ☺
    Scritto da
    Ezio
    il 2012-03-18 16:16:12.0 alle 2012-03-18 16:16:12.0
    Trollate totali: 16
    Megaupload Seizure Order “Null and Void”
    In another astonishing development in the Megaupload saga, a judge in New Zealand’s High Court has declared the order used to seize Kim Dotcom’s assets as “null and void”. The blunder, which occurred because the police applied for the wrong type of court order, means that the Megaupload founder could have his property returned.

    Just when it seemed that the handling of the Megaupload case couldn’t get any more controversial, a development from New Zealand has taken things to the next level.

    Following the raids on Kim Dotcom’s mansion in January, police seized millions of dollars worth of property belong to the Megaupload founder. But thanks to a police blunder, he could now see all of those assets returned.

    On Friday, Justice Judith Potter in the High Court declared the order used to seize Dotcom’s property “null and void” after it was discovered that the police had acted under a court order that should have never been granted.

    The error dates back to January when the police applied for the order granting them permission to seize Dotcom’s property. Rather than applying for an interim restraining order, the Police Commissioner applied for a foreign restraining order instead, one which did not give Dotcom a chance to mount a defense.

    According to New Zealand Herald, on January 30th prosecution lawyer Anne Toohey wrote to the court explaining that the wrong order had been applied for and detailed five errors with the application.

    Justice Potter said that police commissioner Peter Marshall tried to correct the error by applying for the correct order after the raids were completed and retrospectively adding the items already seized.

    Although the correct order was eventually granted albeit on a temporary basis, Potter said she will soon rule on whether the “procedural error” will result in Dotcom having his property returned.

    The Crown is arguing that since the new order was granted the earlier error no longer matters, but Dotcom’s legal team framed it rather differently by describing the seizure of assets as “unlawful”.

    Whether the assets are returned will rest on Dotcom’s legal team showing a lack of “good faith” in connection with the blunder. A hearing to decide if the assets will be returned will take place next week.

    **Modificato dall'autore il 18.03.2012 16:17**
    • Avatar
      ☺
      Scritto da
      dada216
      il 2012-03-18 16:28:34.0 alle 2012-03-18 16:28:34.0
      Trollate totali: 6369
      Re: Megaupload Seizure Order “Null and V
      Scritto da: Ezio
      > In another astonishing development in the Megaupload saga, a judge in New Zealand’s High Court has declared the order used to seize Kim Dotcom’s assets as “null and void”. The blunder, which occurred because the police applied for the wrong type of court order, means that the Megaupload founder could have his property returned.
      >

      he's being extradited, so that won't work in the USA. The MU website states that is being taken down by USA agencies, who has to release the property? not NZ...If he gets to the USA and keeps his defence it will be interesting to see if the american court buckles down to corporate interests and allow youtube to continue be as it is and ISP to act legally under DMCA (which was made for ISP) while MU is being taken down.
      For sure this is a very important legal case, one to follow to see what's the future of piracy on the internet will be.
      Please consider the environment before printing this message, 50% of the above is useless!
    • Avatar
      Scritto da
      Non Autenticato
      il 2012-03-18 16:31:01.0 alle 2012-03-18 16:31:01.0
      Re: Megaupload Seizure Order “Null and V
      > In another astonishing development in the Megaupload saga, a judge in New Zealand’s High Court has declared the order used to seize Kim Dotcom’s assets as “null and void”. The blunder, which occurred because the police applied for the wrong type of court order, means that the Megaupload founder could have his property returned.
      >
      > Just when it seemed that the handling of the Megaupload case couldn’t get any more controversial, a development from New Zealand has taken things to the next level.
      >
      > Following the raids on Kim Dotcom’s mansion in January, police seized millions of dollars worth of property belong to the Megaupload founder. But thanks to a police blunder, he could now see all of those assets returned.
      >
      > On Friday, Justice Judith Potter in the High Court declared the order used to seize Dotcom’s property “null and void” after it was discovered that the police had acted under a court order that should have never been granted.
      >
      > The error dates back to January when the police applied for the order granting them permission to seize Dotcom’s property. Rather than applying for an interim restraining order, the Police Commissioner applied for a foreign restraining order instead, one which did not give Dotcom a chance to mount a defense.
      >
      > According to New Zealand Herald, on January 30th prosecution lawyer Anne Toohey wrote to the court explaining that the wrong order had been applied for and detailed five errors with the application.
      >
      > Justice Potter said that police commissioner Peter Marshall tried to correct the error by applying for the correct order after the raids were completed and retrospectively adding the items already seized.
      >
      > Although the correct order was eventually granted albeit on a temporary basis, Potter said she will soon rule on whether the “procedural error” will result in Dotcom having his property returned.
      >
      > The Crown is arguing that since the new order was granted the earlier error no longer matters, but Dotcom’s legal team framed it rather differently by describing the seizure of assets as “unlawful”.
      >
      > Whether the assets are returned will rest on Dotcom’s legal team showing a lack of “good faith” in connection with the blunder. A hearing to decide if the assets will be returned will take place next week.
      >
      > **Modificato dall'autore il 18.03.2012 16:17**

      original belink?
<softv>

Pagina generata in 99 millisecondi

Utenti attivi: 15 nell'ultimo minuto, 30 negli ultimi cinque minuti, 65 negli ultimi 15 minuti