New South Wales Crime Commission v Black [2018] NSWSC 2031

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: New South Wales Crime Commission v Black [2018] NSWSC 2031 Hearing dates: 9 November 2018 Date of orders: 09 November 2018 Decision date: 09 November 2018 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Walton J Decision: In all the circumstances, I make the orders provided with the summons for relief. Catchwords: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) – restraining order – ex parte – orders made Legislation Cited: Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) Category: Principal judgment Parties: New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff) Mitchell James Black (Defendant) Representation: Solicitors: New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff) File Number(s): 2018/347337

ex tempore Judgment 1. HIS HONOUR: The Court has before it a summons which seeks a hearing instanter and ex parte in order to partially deal with the matters in question, with the balance to be listed before this Court at another time. 2. The relief claimed appears under the heading "Relief Claimed" in the summons, which corresponds to the draft orders provided to the Court in support of the application. The application is supported by the affidavit of Ms Katie Elaine Bourne, sworn 8 November 2018. The application is also supported by a statement of facts and circumstances, as required on an application for a restraining order, pursuant to r 1.26 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW). 3. Pursuant to s 10A of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) ("the Act"), the NSW Crime Commission may apply for a restraining order in respect of the interests in question, in this case interest in property of Mitchell James Black. The affidavit of Ms Bourne discloses that she is an authorised officer for the purposes of the Act and suspects Mr Black of having engaged in serious crime related activity, namely, supply prohibited drug of an amount not less than the commercial quantity applicable to that drug, contrary to s 25(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW). 4. I note, further, that Ms Bourne gives the grounds upon which the suspicion is held, that is a suspicion of Mr Black having engaged in serious crime related activity. In that respect, I further observe that Ms Bourne was provided with and accepted a police facts statement that describes the suspected serious criminal activity in which Ms Bourne suspects Mr Black to have engaged in. 5. It was also noted in the fact sheet that Ms Bourne has ascertained that Mr Black has been charged with the offences described in the fact sheet. 6. In my view, there are reasonable grounds for Ms Bourne's suspicion that Mr Black has engaged in serious crime related activity. 7. The Commission, by its summons, is also seeking, in respect of Mr Black, an assets forfeiture order pursuant to s 22 of the Act, and an unexplained wealth order pursuant to s 28A of the Act. I do not repeat, for the purposes of this judgment, the facts and circumstances in particular relied upon by Ms Bourne with respect to the assets forfeiture order and the unexplained wealth order, but note that I consider that there is sufficient basis for the making of the order, having regard to that which is disclosed in para 6 of the facts statement. 8. Finally, before disposing of the matter in its entirety, I should note that in my view, upon the circumstances outlined in the affidavit of Ms Bourne as to this particular matter, there was a proper basis upon which the matter may have proceeded as it has ex parte. 9. In all the circumstances, I make the orders provided with the summons for relief. 10. I have executed the order under seal as part of its making and I provide a copy of that to the Commission.