New South Wales Crime Commission v Johan [2013] NSWSC 438

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: New South Wales Crime Commission v Johan [2013] NSWSC 438 Hearing dates: 26 April 2013 Decision date: 26 April 2013 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Schmidt J Decision: Consent orders made. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - procedure - Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 - consent orders Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff) Alex Johan (First Defendant) Jacqueline Daisy Johan (Second Defendant) Representation: Solicitors: Ms E Goh New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff) Milford Haseldine & Williams (Defendants) File Number(s): 2013/30311 Publication restriction: None

EX TEMPORE Judgment 1These proceedings were commenced by summons on 23 April 2009. For reasons published that day by Johnson J orders were made under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 with respect to the defendants. 2Today, the parties have approached the Court asking that further orders be made by consent so as to finalise the proceedings. 3The proposed orders are orders under s 12(1) of the Act in relation to variation of existing orders made. The first is an order pursuant to 12(1) of the Act varying the first restraining order so that it does not apply to the interest of the first defendant in the property specified in schedule 2 to the order. The second is another order under section 12(1) of the Act varying an existing restraining order so that it does not apply to the interest of the second defendant in the property specified in schedule 3 to the order. 4The third is an order directing the release of a part of the property restrained to the second defendant. Next, are orders under s 27(1) of the Act requiring the first defendant to pay the Treasurer the sum of $12,800 and the second defendant to pay the Treasurer the sum of $134,500. There are also orders pursuant to s 101 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 as to interest and an order pursuant to s 10B(4) of the Act that a property at Lurnea may be sold or charged, mortgaged, licensed, leased or otherwise used to raise finance to satisfy either or both of the first or second proceeds assessments orders, already made in these proceedings. 5There are various things noted in the proposed orders including that the first defendant guarantees payment by the second defendant of the second proceeds assessment order and that in consideration of these orders being made, the first defendant and second defendant release the Crown and the plaintiff from any claim for damages in consequence of the making of the first restraining order or otherwise and agree not to appeal from or seek leave to appeal from any order made in these proceedings. 6Having considered the orders which have been made in the proceedings and what is proposed by way of final consent order in order to finalise these proceedings, I am satisfied that justice dictates that the Court's discretion should be exercised in order to make the consent orders which the parties propose. 7For those reasons, I make orders in terms of the proposed consent orders filed today.