Tannous v State of New South Wales [2020] NSWCA 261

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Tannous v State of New South Wales [2020] NSWCA 261 Hearing dates: 3 September 2020 Decision date: 21 October 2020 Before: Basten JA at [1]; McCallum JA at [72]; Simpson AJA at [73] Decision: (1) Grant the applicant leave to appeal from the extended supervision order made in the Common Law Division on 23 March 2020. (2) Dismiss the appeal. Catchwords: CRIME – extended supervision order – validity –unacceptable risk of committing another serious offence – whether unacceptable risk must subsist throughout the duration of the order – Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), ss 5B, 10, 11 STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION – objects clause –statutory statement of objects as aid to construction STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – clear statement rule – right to liberty – not available to subvert power to make extended supervision order – Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), s 5B WORDS and PHRASES – "unacceptable risk"; "high risk offender"; "high degree of probability" – Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) Legislation Cited: Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), ss 3, 5B, 5C, 5D, 5E, 5G, 9, 10, 13, 22, 24AB, 24AC, 24AF; Pt 1A, Pt 4A Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Amendment Act 2017 (NSW), Sch 1 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 5, 37, 39 Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), ss 33, 35 Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW), s 20 Serious Sex Offenders Monitoring Act 2005 (Vic), ss 11, 12, 13, 14 Cases Cited: ARM v Secretary to the Department of Justice (2008) 29 VR 472; [2008] VSCA 266 Bugmy v State of New South Wales [2017] NSWCA 25 Coulton v Holcombe (1986) 162 CLR 1; [1986] HCA 33 Lynn v State of New South Wales (2016) 91 NSWLR 636; [2016] NSWCA 57 Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning v Rosemount Estates Pty Ltd (1996) 91 LGERA 31 New South Wales v WXN1 [2020] NSWSC 993 S v Australian Crime Commission (2005) 144 FCR 431; [2005] FCA 1310 State of New South Wales v Donovan (2015) 90 NSWLR 389; [2015] NSWCA 280 State of New South Wales v Naaman (No 2) [2018] NSWCA 328 Texts Cited: DC Pearce, Statutory Interpretation in Australia (LexisNexis Butterworths, 9th ed, 2019) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Steven James Tannous (Applicant) State of New South Wales (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr R J Wilson SC / Mr R El-Choufani (Applicant) Mr D Kell SC / Ms Z Heger (Respondent)