New South Wales Crime Commission v Dunstane [2014] NSWSC 640

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: New South Wales Crime Commission v Dunstane [2014] NSWSC 640 Hearing dates: 20 May 2014 Decision date: 20 May 2014 Before: Schmidt J Decision: Consent orders made Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - procedure - Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) - consent orders Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff) Mark Andrew Dunstone (Defendant) Representation: Ms A Miranda New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff) File Number(s): 2013/170459 Publication restriction: None

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT 1These proceedings were commenced by summons in May 2013, supported by an affidavit sworn by Mr Spark, the NSW Crime Commission's Director (Financial Investigations), who deposed to his suspicions that the defendant, Mark Andrew Dunstone, had engaged in serious crime related activity, namely, supply and taking part in the supply of prohibited drugs, amphetamine and methylamphetamine, contrary to s 25(1) and s 25A(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) and participating in a criminal group contrary to s 93T of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), for reasons there explained. 2In May 2013, restraining and other orders were made by Harrison J under s 10A and s 12 of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW), in respect of the Mr Dunstone's interests in certain property. 3The parties now ask the Court to make further orders by consent, joining Paola Valenzuela as the second defendant to the proceedings; granting the Crime Commission leave to amend its summons; varying the restraining orders made against Mr Dunstone; making orders under s 10B as to reasonable legal expenses and otherwise vesting certain property belonging to Mr Dunstone and Ms Valuenzela to the Crown under s 22, subject to provisions under s 10B as to their reasonable legal expenses. 4Ms Valenzuela has indicated her consent to her joinder to the proceedings and the terms of the order proposed to be made against her by executing the proposed consent orders on 14 May 2014. Her signature was witnessed by Mr Mark Rumour, as her solicitor. Ms Miranda has today announced an appearance for Mr Mark Rumour, as solicitor for both defendants. 5Having considered the terms of the orders sought, the other agreements which the parties have entered into and the circumstances in which they have been reached, I am satisfied that the Court's discretion should be exercised in the terms which the parties have agreed. 6Accordingly, I make orders in the agreed terms.