Attorney General of New South Wales v Ramirez [2022] NSWSC 1241

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Attorney General of New South Wales v Ramirez [2022] NSWSC 1241 Hearing dates: 14 September 2022 Date of orders: 19 September 2022 Decision date: 19 September 2022 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Harrison J Decision: See [30] Catchwords: CIVIL – Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 – application for order to appoint medical practitioners to examine and furnish reports on the defendant – application for interim extension order – unacceptable risk – less restrictive means – extension granted Legislation Cited: Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW), s 14 Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW), ss 122, 125, 126, 127, 130, 131 Cases Cited: Attorney-General (NSW) v Quinn [2007] NSWSC 456 Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Attorney General of New South Wales (Plaintiff) James Aaron Ramirez (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: A Rose (Plaintiff) C Goodhand (Defendant)

Solicitors: Crown Solicitor's Office (Plaintiff) Legal Aid (NSW) (Defendant) File Number(s): 2022/135654 Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment 1. HIS HONOUR: By summons filed on 11 May 2022, the Attorney General for New South Wales seeks interim orders as follows: 1. An order pursuant to s 126(5) of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020: 1. Appointing two qualified psychiatrists, registered psychologists or medical practitioners, as agreed by the parties, to conduct separate examinations of the defendant and to furnish reports to the Supreme Court on the results of those examinations by 28 October 2022; and 2. Directing the defendant to attend those examinations. 1. An order pursuant to ss 130 and 131 of the Act, that the defendant be subject to an interim order for the extension of his status as a forensic patient commencing from midnight on 29 September 2022 for a period of three months or until the proceedings are finally determined. 1. That application is supported by a series of affidavits affirmed by Jessica Leigh Murty. Those affidavits annex or refer to substantial material to which I have paid particular regard. Ms Murty was not required for cross-examination. The interim orders sought by the plaintiff are neither consented to nor opposed by Mr Ramirez.