LAWRENCE v. NSW POLICE SERVICE & ANOR [2004] NSWSC 59

Reported Decision : 144 A Crim R 396

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : LAWRENCE v. NSW POLICE SERVICE & ANOR [2004] NSWSC 59 HEARING DATE(S) : Monday 16 February 2004 JUDGMENT DATE : 16 February 2004 JURISDICTION: Civil JUDGMENT OF : Greg James J at 1 DECISION : Both warrants quashed. Declare that both warrants at the time of their issue did not comply with the requirements of the Act, as to be warrants under s.16 having the lawful effect the Act would have conferred upon valid warrants. Second defendant to pay the plainitff's costs of the proceedings.

CATCHWORDS : Administrative law - listening device warrants - necessary compliance with statutory requirements for issue - sufficient description of prescribed offence - definition of prescribed offence - inability to relate terms used in warrant referring to prescribed offence as referring to any partciular offence known to the law. Controlled Substances Act (SA) 1984 Listening Devices Act 1984 Business Franchise Licenses (Tobacco) Act 1987 LEGISLATION CITED : Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Supreme Court Act 1970 Crimes Act 1900 Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 1989 Ousley (1997) 192 CLR 69 Commissioner of Police v. Barbaro [2001] NSWCA 57 Haynes v. Attorney General for NSW (James, J., unreported 9 February 1996) CASES CITED : Eade [2000] NSWCCA 369 Bayeh v. Taylor & Ors (Grove, J., unreported 4 February 1998) Eid & Ors [1999] NSWCCA 59 Tillett; ex parte Newton [1969] 14 FLR 101 Coward v. Allen (1984) 52 ALR 320 PARTIES : LAWRENCE, Mark Homelsdale v. NEW SOUTH WALES POLICE SERVICE & ANOR FILE NUMBER(S) : SC No. 13130 of 2003 COUNSEL : Plaintiff: M. Abbott Defendant: P.J. Saidi SOLICITORS : Plaintiff: Patsouris & Associates Defendant: I.V. Knight