Commissioner of Police v Jackson [2015] NSWSC 96

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Commissioner of Police v Jackson [2015] NSWSC 96 Hearing dates: 13 February 2015 Date of orders: 13 February 2015 Decision date: 20 February 2015 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Schmidt J Decision: Order sought granted. Catchwords: MEETINGS - public meetings and assemblies - unlawful assembly - application for order under s 25 Summary Offences Act 1988 (NSW) – application granted Legislation Cited: Public Assemblies Act 1979 (NSW) Summary Offences Regulation 2010 (NSW) Summary Offences Act 1988 (NSW) Cases Cited: Commissioner of Police v Allen (1984) 14 A Crim R 244 Commissioner of Police v Gabriel [2004] NSWSC 31 Commissioner of Police v Rintoul [2003] NSWSC 662 New South Wales Commissioner of Police v Bainbridge [2007] NSWSC 1015 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Commissioner of Police (Plaintiff) Ray Jackson (Defendant) Representation: Solicitors: Mr J Harris I V Knight, Crown Solicitor (Plaintiff) Mr R Jackson, unrepresented (Defendant) File Number(s): 2015/42668 Publication restriction: None

Judgment 1. On 10 February 2015 the Commissioner of Police sought leave to file a summons seeking an order under s 25 of the Summary Offences Act 1988 (NSW), prohibiting a public assembly involving a proposed procession from Waterloo to Circular Quay to commence at 10.30am on Saturday, 14 February. The purpose was notified to be a march to commemorate the 11th anniversary of the death of TJ Hickey, during a police pursuit. The application was supported by an affidavit sworn by a solicitor employed in the Crown Solicitor's Office, Mr Butler. 2. Garling J granted that leave and gave directions for the preparation of the application for urgent hearing. The matter was mentioned on 11 February and listed for hearing before me on 13 February, his Honour urging the parties to resolve their differences. On 13 February the Commissioner's application was pressed, no agreement having been reached between them. 3. Section 27 of the Act requires that an application such as this be dealt with "the greatest expedition possible", to ensure that it is not frustrated by reason of the Court's decision being delayed until after the date on which the public assembly is proposed to be held. Accordingly, at the conclusion of the hearing on 13 February, I announced that I was satisfied that the Commissioner had met the onus falling upon him and accordingly made the order sought, giving a short explanation for the conclusion which I had reached. 4. These are the complete reasons which I then indicated I would later give.