NSW Crime Commission v Jose Maria Garcia

[2015] NSWSC 674

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	NSW Crime Commission v Jose Maria Garcia [2015] NSWSC 674
Hearing dates:	28 May 2015
Date of orders:	28 May 2015
Decision date:	28 May 2015
Jurisdiction:	Common Law
Before:	Hamill J
Decision:	Restraining order made on plaintiff’s undertaking as to damages.
Catchwords:	Restraining orders – criminal assets – no question of principle
Legislation Cited:	Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Plaintiff - New South Wales Crime Commission Defendant - Jose Maria Garcia (also known as Pepe Garcia)
Representation:	Solicitor: Ms Miranda for the New South Wales Crime Commission
File Number(s):	2015/00158633

EX TEMPORE Judgment

1. HIS HONOUR: The New South Wales Crime Commission (who I will refer to as the plaintiff) seeks a restraining order under s 10A of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (“CARA”) in respect of property identified in the summons and short minutes of order and the affidavit of Mr Spark.

2. The defendant is Jose Maria Garcia also known as “Pepe”. The plaintiff brings this application by summons filed in court this morning and supports that summons by a statement of facts and circumstances signed by the solicitor Ms Miranda and an affidavit of Jonathan Lee Spark, an employee of the plaintiff.

3. The affidavit of Mr Spark sets out his belief (and the grounds of that belief) that the defendant engaged in a serious crime related activity and in particular supplying a prohibited drug in an amount greater than a large commercial quantity. The prohibited drug in question is methylamphetamine.

4. In para 6 of his affidavit Mr Spark sets out in point form the basis upon which he holds that belief.

5. The affidavit annexes a number of documents, the most significant of which is a facts sheet prepared by an officer of the New South Wales Police Force. That facts sheet shows that certain surveillance was undertaken by the Police following their suspicions that the defendant was engaged in drug supply.

6. At some stage a search was undertaken of a back pack being carried by the defendant and that back pack was found to contain two kilograms of a substance believed to be methyl amphetamine as well as some cash. Based on the information in that facts sheet the suspicion held by Mr Spark is in my opinion held on reasonable grounds and accordingly pursuant to s 10A(5) CARA. I must make the restraining that is sought.

7. The relevant facts set out in the affidavit of Mr Spark as to his belief as to the nature of that property in relation to which the orders are sought. Accordingly I make orders in accordance with the short minutes of order provided by the plaintiff. Orders to be taken out forthwith.

**********

Decision last updated: 02 June 2015