NSW Crime Commission v Jovanovski

[2016] NSWSC 1879

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

NSW Crime Commission v Jovanovski [2016] NSWSC 1879

Hearing dates:

13 December 2016

Date of orders:

13 December 2016

Decision date:

13 December 2016

Jurisdiction:

Common Law

Before:

Campbell J

Decision:

Pursuant to section 10A of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 no person (other than any registered mortgagee dealing with its right to do so under the registered mortgage) is to dispose of, or attempt to dispose of, or otherwise deal with or attempt to otherwise deal with any interest in property (within the meaning of “interest in property” as defined in section 7 of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990) of Tony Jovanovski, including the interest in property in the property specified in Schedule One hereto.

Pursuant to section 12(1)(b)(i) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 Tony Jovanovski shall be examined on oath before a Registrar of the Court concerning his affairs, including the nature and location of any property in which he has an interest.

Pursuant to section 12(1)(b1) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 Aneta Jovanovski shall be examined on oath before a Registrar of the Court concerning the affairs of Aneta Jovanovski, including the nature and location of any property in which Aneta Jovanovski or Tony Jovanovski has an interest.

Leave is granted to the Plaintiff to obtain from the Registry dates for the examinations ordered in Orders 2 and 3 above.

Pursuant to section 12(1)(c1) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 Tony Jovanovski shall furnish to the Plaintiff, within twenty one (21) days after service of a sealed copy of these orders on Tony Jovanovski, a statement verified by oath of Tony Jovanovski setting out the particulars sought in Schedule Two hereto.

Liberty is granted to the Plaintiff and Tony Jovanovski to apply on three (3) days’ notice.

The costs of obtaining these orders shall be costs in the cause.

The balance of the Summons filed in these proceedings be stood over for mention on 27 March 2017.

Pursuant to Rule 36.4(1)(a) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 these orders are to take effect as of the date hereof.

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW - procedure - Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 - orders made

Legislation Cited:

Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) ss 4, 10, 12, 25
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), ss 25, 25A

Category:

Consequential orders (other than Costs)

Parties:

New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff)
Tony Jovanovski (Defendant)

Representation:

Counsel: R. Katrib (Crime Commission)

File Number(s):

2016/373275

Publication restriction:

Non publication orders

ex tempore judgment (rEVISED)

1. By summons filed today, the New South Wales Crime Commission is seeking relief under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) concerning the interests in property of a person I have directed should be referred to only as "TJ" in court today.

2. The principal relief sought in the summons is an unexplained wealth order; however a restraining order under s 10A of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act and ancillary orders under s 12 of that Act are sought today concerning TJ's interest in property.

3. I am satisfied on the evidence of Ms Katie Elaine Bourne, contained in her affidavit sworn 13 December 2016, that I should proceed ex parte. I am not of the view that any person should be given notice of the application at this time.

4. I am satisfied Ms Bourne is an authorised officer of the Commission as defined in s 4(1) of the Act and that she is a financial investigator employed by the Commission.

5. The application is made on the ground set out in s 10A(5)(a)(i), that is to say, that TJ is a person engaged in serious crime related activity. Ms Bourne's affidavit, in compliance with the Act, sets out the ground on which her suspicion in that regard is based and I am satisfied, having regard to the material annexed to the affidavit, that there are reasonable grounds for her suspicion.

6. There are a number of matters which lead me to this conclusion. I am satisfied that the evidence provides reasonable grounds for the suspicion that TJ has engaged in the serious crime related activity of supplying prohibited drugs contrary to s 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) and supplying prohibited drugs on an ongoing basis pursuant to s 25A of the same Act. The amount involved on the material collated by the police as a result of the controlled operation exceeds the commercial quantity of the prohibited drug.

7. I am also satisfied on the basis of the same material that TJ is a person who has acquired very significant assets and been responsible for a number of large cash transactions made over a number of years in circumstances where apparently he is in receipt of Centrelink benefits and perhaps a modest rental income from real property.

8. These matters satisfy me, as I have said, that there are reasonable grounds for the suspicion that Ms Bourne in fact holds and it is appropriate that the restraining order sought by the Commission can be made in terms of the form of order, handed up by Ms Katrib.

9. I am also satisfied it is likely the whole truth about TJ's interest in property has not yet been ascertained and accordingly it is appropriate that orders be made under s 12 requiring the provision of particulars, and also requiring that he and his spouse be subject to an examination before the Registrar.

10. For these reasons, I make an order in accordance with the form of order signed by me and dated today. I direct that the order may be entered forthwith and that the court seal be affixed to the form of order handed up by Ms Katrib.

**********

Decision last updated: 23 October 2018