State of New South Wales v Elomar (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 1034

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Elomar (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 1034 Hearing dates: 4 May 2018 Date of orders: 08 May 2018 Decision date: 05 July 2018 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Rothman J Decision: (1) An order pursuant to s 24(5) of the THRO Act:

(a) appointing a qualified psychiatrist and a registered psychologist to conduct separate psychiatric and psychological examinations (as the case may be) of the defendant and to furnish reports to the Supreme Court on the results of those examinations by a date to be fixed by the Court; and

(b) directing the defendant to attend those examinations.

(2) An order:

(a) pursuant to s 27 of the THRO Act, that the defendant be subject to an Interim Supervision Order commencing on 8 May 2018;

(b) pursuant to s 28(1) of the THRO Act, that the Interim Supervision Order be for a period of 28 days (noting that, pursuant to s 28(6) of the THRO Act, such period is to be suspended during any period in which the defendant is in lawful custody);

(c) pursuant to s 29 of the THRO Act, directing that the defendant, for the period of the Interim Supervision Order, comply with the conditions set out in the Schedule to this Order (attached).

(3) An order restricting access to the Court's file in this proceeding such that access would be permitted to a non-party only with the leave of a Judge of the Court, and with prior notice to the parties so as to allow them an opportunity to be heard in respect of the application for access.

(4) Liberty to apply on three (3) days' notice. Catchwords: HIGH RISK OFFENDERS – Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act – Interim Supervision Order – analysis of facts alleged – order granted Legislation Cited: Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007, s (13)(1) Crimes (Foreign Incursions and Recruitment) Act 1978 (Cth), s 6 Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 Crimes Act 1900, s 60(3A) Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 Cases Cited: Cornwell v Attorney General of NSW [2007] NSWCA 374 Lynn v State of NSW (2016) 91 NSWLR 636; [2016] NSWCA 57 State of New South Wales v Ceissman [2018] NSWSC 508 State of NSW v Pacey [2015] NSWSC 1983 State of NSW v Thurston [2018] NSWSC 421 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: State of New South Wales (Plaintiff) Ahmad Elomar (Defendant) Attorney General of New South Wales (Applicant on Motion) Representation: Counsel: B Hughes SC / T Phillips (Plaintiff) G James QC (Defendant) P Singleton (Applicant on Motion)