Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: NSW Crime Commission v Brendon Phong Tran (No 3) [2014] NSWSC 1393 Hearing dates: 26 September 2014 Decision date: 26 September 2014 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Schmidt J Decision: Orders sought made. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - restraining orders - variation sought by consent - orders made Legislation Cited: Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) Cases Cited: New South Wales Crime Commission v Brendon Phong Tran (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 1854 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff) Brendon Phong Tran (First Defendant) Thi Phuc Vo (Second Defendant) Kim Christine Tran (Third Defendant) Donna Lee Tran (Fourth Defendant) Representation: Solicitors: Ms E Goh (Plaintiff) File Number(s): 2011/293013 Publication restriction: None EX TEMPORE Judgment 1HER HONOUR: These are proceedings brought under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW). Orders were made in the proceedings by Garling J in September 2011 under s 10A of the Act restraining the disposal or attempted disposal of property identified in that order. 2By orders made by Davies J on 11 December 2013 the fourth defendant became a party to the proceedings and orders were made in respect of the disposal of the assets (see New South Wales Crime Commission v Brendon Phong Tran (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 1854). 3The plaintiff now seeks a variation of the restraining order against the fourth defendant to permit the property, the subject of the restraining order made by Davies J, to be varied for the purpose of paying money owing by the fourth defendant to the Water Corporation, in relation to property specified in Schedule 2 to the order. The fourth defendant consents to that order. 4In the circumstances presently before the Court, I am satisfied that it is appropriate to vary the order earlier made in the proceedings as I have described, in the terms agreed by the parties. 5Accordingly, I make orders in the terms agreed. ********** DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 19 December 2014