Bow Ye Investments Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) v Director of Public Prosecutions (Victoria) & Ors

Bow Ye Investments Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) (the applicant) sought judicial review of decisions made by the Director of Public Prosecutions (Victoria) (the first respondent) and the Chief Commissioner of Police (the second respondent). The dispute concerned the applicant's entitlement to the return of certain property seized by the police under a search warrant, which property was subsequently forfeited to the Crown under the *Confiscation Act 1985* (Vic). The applicant argued that the forfeiture was unlawful because the property had been seized under a warrant that was itself invalid. The matter came before the High Court of Australia.

The High Court was required to determine whether the forfeiture of the applicant's property was valid, notwithstanding the alleged invalidity of the search warrant under which the property was seized. Specifically, the Court had to consider the effect of the *Confiscation Act 1985* (Vic) on the rights of a party whose property was seized under a warrant later found to be defective, and whether the Director of Public Prosecutions had the power to direct the forfeiture of property in such circumstances.

The Court held that the forfeiture provisions of the *Confiscation Act 1985* (Vic) operated independently of the validity of the warrant used to seize the property. The Act provided a statutory mechanism for forfeiture upon the satisfaction of certain conditions, irrespective of how the property came into the possession of law enforcement. The Court reasoned that the purpose of the Act was to facilitate the confiscation of property derived from or used in connection with criminal activity, and that a narrow interpretation focusing on the technical validity of the seizure warrant would undermine this purpose. The Court applied the principle that statutory provisions conferring powers of forfeiture should be construed to give effect to their intended purpose, which in this instance was to remove the proceeds of crime from those who possessed them.

The High Court dismissed the applicant's application for judicial review.