New South Wales Crime Commission v Spooner

The New South Wales Crime Commission sought an ex parte restraining order against Mr Spooner under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW). The commission sought to restrain Spooner from dealing with his property or any property in which he had an interest, due to suspicions that the property was derived from criminal activity. Spooner opposed the application on the basis that the commission had not proven that the property in question was derived from criminal conduct. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court was required to determine whether the commission had demonstrated a sufficient likelihood that the property was derived from criminal conduct to justify making an ex parte restraining order. The court considered the commission's evidence, which included expert evidence from a forensic accountant, and concluded that the commission had made out a case that was strong enough to justify the making of an ex parte order. The court also considered the balance of convenience and concluded that Spooner had not demonstrated that the making of the order would cause him significant hardship.

The court found that the commission had demonstrated a sufficient likelihood that the property was derived from criminal conduct and that the making of the ex parte restraining order was justified. The court accepted the commission's evidence, including the expert evidence from the forensic accountant, and concluded that there was a real prospect that the commission would be able to prove that the property was derived from criminal conduct at a hearing. The court also found that the balance of convenience favoured the making of the order, as Spooner had not demonstrated that the making of the order would cause him significant hardship. The court made the restraining order as sought by the commission.