Anderson v State of New South Wales

The appeal concerned a decision of the primary judge to make a continuing detention order against a high-risk sex offender, Mr Anderson, under the *Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006* (NSW). The appeal was brought by Mr Anderson against the State of New South Wales. The Court of Appeal, comprising Bathurst CJ, Beazley P and Leeming JA, considered whether the primary judge had erred in making this order.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge had failed to determine whether an extended supervision order would provide adequate supervision for Mr Anderson, and whether the primary judge had erred by failing to have regard to a report prepared by Corrective Services. These issues arose in the context of the court's obligations under sections 5D and 17(4) of the *Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006* (NSW).

The Court of Appeal found that the primary judge had erred in both respects. It reasoned that the Act required the court to consider the adequacy of supervision under an extended supervision order before making a continuing detention order. Furthermore, the court held that the primary judge should have considered the report from Corrective Services, as it was relevant to the assessment of risk and supervision. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the primary judge's orders were set aside, and the matter was remitted to a judge of the Common Law Division for redetermination. An interim supervision order was also imposed.