Cassar v New South Wales Crime Commission

In *Cassar v New South Wales Crime Commission*, the appellant sought to set aside a restraining order made under the *Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990* (NSW). The restraining order was based on a warranty provided by the appellant's solicitor concerning certain assets. The core of the dispute revolved around whether this warranty was validly given and whether the solicitor had the authority to provide it. The matter was heard by Bathurst CJ, Beazley P, and Emmett JA in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, whether the warranty as to assets, as contemplated by section 31A of the *Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990*, was required to be given personally by the registered owner of the assets. Secondly, the Court had to consider whether the solicitor who provided the warranty was acting within the scope of their actual or apparent authority when doing so, pursuant to section 55(4) of the Act.

The Court reasoned that section 31A of the *Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990* did not mandate that the warranty be given personally by the registered owner. Instead, it could be provided by an authorised agent. The Court further held that the solicitor possessed both actual and apparent authority to provide the warranty on behalf of the appellant. This conclusion was based on the evidence presented, which indicated that the solicitor had been instructed by the appellant to deal with the matter and that the Crime Commission had reasonably relied on the solicitor's apparent authority. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.