New South Wales Crime Commission v Alameddine

[2017] NSWSC 701

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	New South Wales Crime Commission v Alameddine [2017] NSWSC 701
Hearing dates:	In Chambers
Date of orders:	02 June 2017
Decision date:	02 June 2017
Jurisdiction:	Common Law
Before:	Schmidt J
Decision:	Orders made in the terms sought, as well as ordering that the Commission serve a copy of this judgment on Mr Alameddine.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW - procedure - restraining orders sought - 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:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff) Ahmad Said Alameddine also known as Michael Saide Alameddine (Defendant)
Representation:	Solicitors: R Katrib, New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff)
File Number(s):	2017/00165937
Publication restriction:	No

Judgment

1. By summons which I grant leave to file, the New South Wales Crime Commission applied ex-parte, seeking restraining orders under s 10A of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act1990 (NSW) in relation to the interest in certain property of the defendant, Ahmad Said Alameddine. Other orders under ss 12(1), 28A of that Act and s 101 of the Civil Procedure Act2005 (NSW) were also sought. The orders pressed were for restraining orders under s 10A, as well as orders under s 12(1)(b) and (c).

2. The application was supported by an affidavit sworn on 26 May 2017 by Katie Elaine Bourne, the Commission’s Director, Assessments and an authorised officer under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act, as well as by a statement of facts and circumstances provided in accordance with r 1.26 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).

3. For the reasons which follow, I am satisfied that the orders sought should be made.

4. The properties sought to be restrained are identified in a schedule to the summons as real properties located at Kelso and Walang, registered in the name of Mr Alameddine, as well as vehicles registered in his name and funds held in bank accounts in his name.

5. Ms Bourne deposed that she suspected that Mr Alameddine is also known as Michael Saide Alameddine and that he had engaged in serious crime related activities within the definition of a “serious crime related activity” in s 6 of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act, namely, supplying a prohibited drug, synthetic cannabis, of greater than the indictable quantity and less than the commercial quantity, contrary to s 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act1985 (NSW). This is an offence falling within the definition of “serious criminal offence under s 6(2) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act.

6. Ms Bourne also gave a detailed explanation of the basis upon which she came to hold that suspicion. It rested on a consideration of documents obtained by employees of the Commission, including searches conducted of the records held in the COPS database and:

A Facts Sheet relating to the first drug offence with which Mr Alameddine has been charged and questions which Ms Bourne posed to Senior Constable Unicomb, who was involved in the arrest and charging of Mr Alameddine in relation to that offence and responses which he gave;

Records establishing that Mr Alameddine was charged with the offence to which the Facts Sheet related;

A second Facts Sheet relating to other drug possession and supply offences, as well as fireman and other offences and questions which Ms Bourne posed to Senior Constable Boorer and responses which he gave about that Facts Sheet;

Searches of the LPI, Veda and RMS databases in relation to ownership of the properties and vehicles the subject of the application; and

Information provided by the ANZ and Commonwealth Banks in relation to the funds the subject of the application.

7. The first Facts Sheet revealed that in February 2017, during a random breath test, Mr Alameddine’s vehicle came to be searched, with the result that black foil packages suspected of containing synthetic cannabinoid substances, as well as tobacco were found. The total weight of the drug seized was 79.8 grams.

8. The second Facts Sheet, revealed that in February 2017 during a search of a business franchise owned and operate by Mr Alameddine, further packets of synthetic cannabis were found in his vehicle, about which he made certain admissions, as well as loose cannabis and other packages some containing cannabis and other containing synthetic cannabis. Tobacco was also found in the premises, along with unsecured firearms and ammunition.

9. Additionally, Ms Bourne had regard to information obtained as the result of searches conducted of the LPI, Veda and RMS databases in relation to the property of Mr Alameddine.

10. Ms Bourne deposed to her experience that in the absence of a restraining order, it is possible for people very quickly to attempt to enter into unregistered mortgages in relation to real estate and to withdraw funds from bank accounts and to dispose of interests in vehicles by backdating documents, in order to attempt to defeat the operation of the Act.

11. She also deposed to her view that, given the serious nature of the criminal activity in which Mr Alameddine is apparently involved, that he should not be given notice of this application. That is a course available under the Act, although s 10A(4) permits a different course to be taken, if the Court thinks fit.

12. Section 10A(5) requires the making of the orders sought under the Act, if the Court considers that there are reasonable grounds for the suspicions to which Ms Bourne has deposed.

13. In this case, I am satisfied that the material relied on well establishes that there are reasonable grounds for the suspicions to which Ms Bourne has deposed and that the requirements of s 10A(5) of the Act have been addressed. In that situation, the Act requires that the orders sought in relation to the property in question be made.

14. In the circumstances, I have concluded that it was also appropriate to make the other orders sought.

15. I have reached those conclusions after consideration of the material relied on, including what was disclosed in the Facts Sheets, as to which Ms Bourne deposed that she believed in the truth of its contents.

16. All of these matters, I am satisfied, provide a proper basis for the making of the orders sought.

17. On the evidence, I am also satisfied that the Commission ought not to be required to give notice of this application to Mr Alameddine and that it should be dealt with ex-parte. In coming to that view, I have had regard to the provisions of s 10C of the Act, which permits an affected person to apply to have a restraining order set aside, as well as the liberty granted in the order to the parties to apply to the Court on three days’ notice.

Orders

18. Accordingly, I make orders in the terms sought, as well as ordering that the Commission serve a copy of this judgment on Mr Alameddine.

**********

Decision last updated: 27 July 2017