Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: New South Wales Crime Commission v Nguyen [2018] NSWSC 1858 Hearing dates: 26 November 2018 Date of orders: 26 November 2018 Decision date: 26 November 2018 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: McCallum J Decision: Pursuant to section 12(1)(b1) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990, Thi Hue Nguyen be examined on oath before a Registrar of the Court concerning the affairs of Thi Hue Nguyen, including the nature and location of any property in which Thi Hue Nguyen has an interest; leave is granted to the plaintiff to obtain from the Registry dates for the examinations order in Order 1; that the Crime Commission arrange and meet the expense of a Vietnamese interpreter to assist Mrs Nguyen at the examination. Catchwords: PROCEDURE – proceedings for confiscation of property – application to examine spouse of defendant on oath concerning affairs of the defendant – appropriateness of ordering the Crime Commission to provide and bear costs of interpreter Legislation Cited: Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW), s 12(1)(b1) Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: New South Wales Crime Commission (plaintiff) Van Thuong Nguyen (defendant) Thi Hue Nguyen (interested party) Representation: Counsel: S Santhikumar (solicitor for plaintiff) (ex parte application) Thi Hue Nguyen (interested party) (self represented) Solicitors: New South Wales Crime Commission (plaintiff) File Number(s): 2016/312220 Publication restriction: None Judgment ex tempore – revised 1. HER HONOUR: These are proceedings for confiscation brought by the New South Wales Crime Commission against Van Thuong Nguyen. The defendant has pleaded guilty to drug offences and is currently serving a term of imprisonment. By notice of motion filed 10 October 2018, the Crime Commission seeks an order pursuant to s 12(1)(b1) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) that his wife, Thi Hue Nguyen, be examined on oath before a registrar concerning her affairs, including the nature and location of any property in which she or the defendant has an interest. 2. The basis for the application is that there is real property registered in the names of the both the defendant and Mrs Nguyen as joint tenants. 3. Mrs Nguyen has appeared for herself this morning. She has indicated to me that she understands, at some level, the nature of the order sought but that she thinks it would be appropriate for her to have an interpreter to assist her at the examination. Having heard from her this morning, I am satisfied that is appropriate. 4. Ordinarily in civil proceedings the parties must provide any interpreter required for the purpose of proceedings. That is in contrast with the position in criminal proceedings where, if an accused person or a witness called by the accused requires an interpreter, that is arranged by the Court. 5. In my view, however, having regard to nature of these civil proceedings, in which the defendant and the respondent to the present application face forfeiture of their assets at the suit of the Crime Commission, effectively for the benefit of the State, it is appropriate that the Crime Commission provide and pay for the interpreter. 6. Ms Santhikumar, who appears for the Crime Commission, has obtained instructions to consent to that course. Accordingly, I make the orders sought in the form of order handed up with the additional following order: that the Crime Commission arrange and meet the expense of a Vietnamese interpreter to assist Mrs Nguyen at the examination. ********** Amendments 10 December 2018 - Publication restriction lifted 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: 10 December 2018