New South Wales Crime Commission v Paterson [2021] NSWSC 284

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: New South Wales Crime Commission v Paterson [2021] NSWSC 284 Hearing dates: 17 March 2021 Date of orders: 17 March 2021 Decision date: 17 March 2021 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Hamill J (as Duty Judge) Decision: See paragraphs [6] and [7]. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – criminal assets recovery - restraining orders – ex parte – orders made – no question of principle Legislation Cited: Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW), ss 10, 10A, 12 Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), s 25(2) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 193C(1) Category: Procedural rulings Parties: NSW Crime Commission (Plaintiff) Drew Mervyn Paterson (Defendant) Representation: Solicitors: Crown Solicitors Office (Plaintiff) File Number(s): 2021/00075580 Publication restriction: Nil

EX TEMPORE Judgment (REVISED) 1. This is an ex parte application for restraining orders under ss 10 and 10A of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) (the Act). The application is brought by summons filed by the NSW Crime Commission (the Commission) this morning. It is supported by an affidavit of Katie Elaine Bourne sworn 16 March 2021 and a statement of facts and circumstances. When I questioned the necessity to make ancillary orders under s 12 of the Act ex parte, the Commission withdrew its application for the orders for compulsory examination of the defendant and the sworn disclosure by him of his assets. 2. Ms Bourne's affidavit establishes the statutory prerequisites for the making of an order. In particular, the evidence establishes that she is an authorised officer of the plaintiff and that she suspects the defendant has engaged in serious crime-related activity. That activity includes supplying a large commercial quantity of cocaine contrary to s 25(2) of the Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) and dealing in the proceeds of crime contrary to s 193C(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). 3. The grounds upon which Ms Bourne holds that suspicion are also set out in the affidavit at paragraph 4. The suspicion is based on information provided by New South Wales police who investigated the defendant and have charged him with certain offences. The police provided Ms Bourne with a statement of facts and this is annexed to her affidavit. 4. It is unnecessary to set out the assertions made in the facts, but the information is clearly capable of grounding the suspicion that Ms Bourne says she has formed. In particular, it is asserted that a one-kilogram block of cocaine was located in the kitchen of the defendant's bungalow, or a bungalow to which he had travelled to, at Raymond Terrace near Newcastle. 5. The defendant had been subject to surveillance and was seen to arrive at the bungalow carrying a shopping bag thought to contain the drugs. Other material was seized including electronic scales and kitchen bags. He is also alleged to have been in possession of a very large quantity of cash. 6. I am satisfied that the restraining order should be made, and I make orders in accordance with draft orders 1, 4, 7, 8, 9 and 10 in the document provided by the plaintiff. 7. I also make an order that there be no publication of these orders until the Crime Commission has served the restraining orders on the defendant and any other relevant or interested party.