NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Thomas (Preliminary) [2011] NSWSC 118 Hearing dates: 24 February 2011 Decision date: 24 February 2011 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: R A Hulme J Decision: Two qualified psychiatrists appointed to conduct separate psychiatric examinations of the defendant and reports to be furnished to the Court Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - Crimes (Serious Sex Offenders) Act 2006 - serious sex offender - preliminary hearing - application for extended supervision order to replace existing continuing detention order - consideration of "unacceptable risk" test - objects of the Act - relevance of offender's participation in rehabilitation program Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Serious Sex Offenders) Act 2006 Crimes (Serious Sex Offenders) Amendment Act 2010 Cases Cited: Attorney General (NSW) v Hayter [2007] NSWSC 983 Attorney General for the State of New South Wales v Tillman [2007] NSWSC 605 Attorney General (New South Wales) v Tillman [2007] NSWCA 119 Cornwall v Attorney General for New South Wales [2007] NSWCA 374 State of New South Wales v Manners [2008] NSWSC 1242 State of New South Wales v Thomas [2008] NSWSC 1340 State of New South Wales v Thomas (Final) [2009] NSWSC 1410 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: State of New South Wales (Plaintiff) Bruce Malcolm Thomas (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr D Staehli SC with Mr D Kell (Plaintiff) Solicitors: Mr P Murphy (Defendant) File Number(s): 2011/41563
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