NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police v Whittall and Anor [2020] NSWSC 1546 Hearing dates: 30 October 2020 Date of orders: 30 October 2020 Decision date: 30 October 2020 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Johnson J Decision: See [94] of judgment. Catchwords: PROCEEDS OF CRIME - restraining order made under s.19 Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) - exclusion order sought concerning certain property - defendants did not proceed with exclusion application which was dismissed - whether exclusion application "withdrawn" within s.49(3)(b) - held that exclusion application was withdrawn - s.49 forfeiture order made - valuation of property undertaken in accordance with s.56 of Act Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Criminal Code (Cth) Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) Cases Cited: Commissioner of Australian Federal Police v Kanjo & Ors (2019) 1 QR 568; [2019] QCA 143 Commissioner of Australian Federal Police v Lee (2016) 310 FLR 293; [2016] NSWSC 915 Commissioner of Australian Federal Police v Omar [2020] NSWSC 418 Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia v Consolidated Media Holdings Ltd (2012) 250 CLR 503; [2012] HCA 55 Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police v Vo (2015) 302 FLR 209; [2015] NSWSC 1523 Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police v W (No 3) [2016] NSWSC 1200 Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police v W (No 4) [2016] NSWSC 1554 Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police v W [2016] NSWSC 683 Independent Commission Against Corruption v Cunneen (2015) 256 CLR 1; [2015] HCA 14 Lee v Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) (2009) 75 NSWLR 581; [2009] NSWCA 347 Lordianto v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (2019) 266 CLR 273; [2019] HCA 39 Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355; [1998] HCA 28 Texts Cited: --- Category: Principal judgment Parties: Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (Plaintiff) Charles Anthony Whittall (First Defendant) Regan Boxall (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr G O'Mahoney (Plaintiff) Mr CA Whittall and Ms R Boxall (In Person)
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