New South Wales Crime Commission v Al Jannat

Case

[2013] NSWSC 935

12 July 2013


Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: New South Wales Crime Commission v Al Jannat [2013] NSWSC 935
Hearing dates:12 July 2013
Decision date: 12 July 2013
Jurisdiction:Common Law - Criminal
Before: Schmidt J
Decision:

Consent orders made.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - procedure - Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 - consent orders
Legislation Cited: Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990
Category:Interlocutory applications
Parties: New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff)
Mohammad Ashabul Al Jannat (Defendant)
Representation: Solicitors:
Ms R Katrib
New South Wales Crime Commission
File Number(s):2012/65470
Publication restriction:None

EX TEMPORE Judgment

  1. By summons filed in February 2012 the New South Wales Crime Commission sought orders against the defendant under s 31D of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990. The application was supported by an affidavit sworn by Mr Spark, the Commission's Director (Financial Investigations), in which he explained the basis upon which he suspected that the defendant had engaged in 'serious crime related activity', as defined in s 6 of the Act.

  1. On 17 September 2012 orders were made by Hall J under s 31D for the examination of the defendant and the provision of a certain statement.

  1. Today the parties ask the Court to make orders in terms which have been filed granting the Commission leave to amend its summons, to seek a forfeiture order under s 22 of the Act in relation to some $57,555 cash seized from the defendant, as well as orders under s 10A and s 10B, in relation to identified property of the defendant and dismissing the unexplained wealth order application.

  1. The parties have also agreed to the terms of a release given by the defendant in favour of the Commission and as to costs.

  1. In the circumstances before the Court I am satisfied that the parties' agreement should be given effect and that orders made in the terms which their solicitors have executed, should be made. I order accordingly.

**********

Decision last updated: 15 July 2013

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

1