Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Booth v Thorne (No 2) [2020] FCA 1196 File number: VID 126 of 2020
Judgment of: ANASTASSIOU J
Date of judgment: 17 August 2020
Date of publication of reasons: 19 August 2020
Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – control orders – application for confirmation of interim control order – terms of confirmed control order agreed between the parties – interim control order confirmed
Legislation: Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)
Cases cited: Booth v Kaya (No 2) [2020] FCA 1119 Booth v Thorne [2020] FCA 445 R v Cerantonio & Ors [2019] VSC 284
Division: General Division
Registry: Western Australia
National Practice Area: Federal Crime and Related Proceedings
Number of paragraphs: 7
Date of hearing: 17 August 2020
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr R. Maidment QC with Ms C. Fitzgerald
Solicitor for the Applicant: Australian Government Solicitor
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr S. Moglia
Solicitor for the Respondent: Doogue + George
ORDERS VID 126 of 2020
BETWEEN: SANDRA BOOTH Applicant
AND: SHAYDEN JAMIL THORNE Respondent
order made by: ANASTASSIOU J DATE OF ORDER: 17 AUGUST 2020
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Pursuant to s 104.14(7)(b) of the Criminal Code, being the Schedule to the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), the interim control order made in relation to the respondent on 6 March 2020 and last varied on 24 June 2020 is confirmed with further variations as set out in red in Annexure A to these Orders. 2. The confirmed control order relates to the respondent, Shayden Jamil Thorne. 3. The Court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that, for the purpose of s 104.4(1)(c)(iv) of the Criminal Code, the respondent has been convicted in Australia of an offence relating to terrorism, namely engaging in conduct in preparation for incursions into foreign countries for the purpose of engaging in hostile activities contrary to s 119.4(1) of the Criminal Code by virtue of s 11.2A of the Criminal Code. 4. The Court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that, for the purposes of s 104.4(1)(c)(vii) of the Criminal Code, the respondent has provided support for or otherwise facilitated the engagement in a hostile activity in a foreign country. 5. The Court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that each of the obligations, prohibitions and restrictions to be imposed on the respondent by the confirmed control order is reasonably necessary, and reasonably appropriate and adapted, for the purposes of s 104.4(1)(d)(i), (ii) and (iii) of the Criminal Code. 6. The confirmed control order is in force until and including 5 March 2021. 7. The respondent's lawyer may attend the AFP Melbourne office at 383 La Trobe Street, Melbourne between 9 am to 4 pm, Monday to Friday in order to obtain a copy of these Orders. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate