Baldwin v State of New South Wales [2020] NSWCA 112

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Baldwin v State of New South Wales [2020] NSWCA 112 Hearing dates: 1 June 2020 Date of orders: 17 June 2020 Decision date: 17 June 2020 Before: Basten JA at [1]; Macfarlan JA at [69]; Emmett AJA at [72] Decision: (1) Grant the applicant leave to appeal pursuant to the summons filed on 13 March 2020.

(2) Grant the applicant leave to amend ground 2 in the summons to include par (aa).

(3) Direct the applicant to file the amended draft notice of appeal within 7 days.

(4) Dismiss the appeal. Catchwords: CRIME – extended supervision order – conditions of order – order requiring consent to searches – validity – whether privilege against self-incrimination abrogated – Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), s 11

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – statutory powers – privilege against self-incrimination – abrogation of privilege – conditions imposed under extended supervision order – consent to searches required – clear statement principle – effect of Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), s 11

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – statutory powers – conditions imposed under extended supervision order – validity – requirement of reasonable belief to initiate search – whether conditions purport to direct or regulate conduct of officers – whether conditions authorised seizure of third party property Legislation Cited: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 597 Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), ss 5B, 9, 11, 12, 13, 13B, 22, 23; Pt 2, Div 4 Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW) ss 15, 16C; Pt 3 Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW), s 21 Cases Cited: Coco v The Queen (1994) 179 CLR 427; [1994] HCA 15 Controlled Consultants Pty Ltd v Commissioner for Corporate Affairs (1984) 156 CLR 385; [1984] HCA 6 Electrolux Home Products Pty Ltd v Australian Workers' Union (2004) 221 CLR 309; [2004] HCA 40 Environment Protection Authority v Caltex Refining Co Pty Ltd (1993) 178 CLR 477; [1993] HCA 74 Gemmell v Le Roi Homestyle Cookies Pty Ltd (In liq) (2014) 46 VR 583; [2014] VSCA 182 Meneses v Directed Electronics OE Pty Ltd [2019] FCAFC 190; 373 ALR 624 Rank Film Distributors Ltd v Video Information Centre [1982] AC 380, 425 (HL) Reid v Howard (1995) 184 CLR 1; [1995] HCA 40 State of New South Wales v Grooms (Final) [2019] NSWSC 353 State of New South Wales v John Raymond Holschier [2016] NSWSC 234 State of New South Wales v Steven Single [2019] NSWSC 176 Tate Access Floors Inc v Boswell [1991] Ch 512 Winters v Attorney General (NSW) [2008] NSWCA 33; 182 A Crim R 107 X7 v Australian Crime Commission (2013) 248 CLR 92; [2013] HCA 29 Texts Cited: NSW Government, Justice and Attorney General, Review of the Crimes (Serious Sex Offenders) Act 2006 (November 2010)