NSW Crime Commission v Scarfo

[2019] NSWSC 783

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	NSW Crime Commission v Scarfo [2019] NSWSC 783
Hearing dates:	30 April 2019
Decision date:	30 April 2019
Jurisdiction:	Common Law
Before:	Ierace J
Decision:	1. Pursuant to s 12(1)(b)(ii) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) Guiseppe Nardi (also known as Joe Nardi) shall be examined on oath before a Registrar of the Court concerning the affairs of Joe Anthony Scarfo, including the nature and location of any property in which Joe Anthony Scarfo has an interest.  2.   Leave be granted to the plaintiff to obtain from the Registry dates for the examinations sought in paragraph 1 above.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – procedure – orders sought for the examination on oath – ex-parte - orders made
Legislation Cited:	Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW)
Category:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff) Joe Anthony Scarfo (Defendant)
Representation:	Solicitors: New South Wales Crime Commission (Plaintiff)
File Number(s):	2014/00046546

Judgment

1. HIS HONOUR: By summons filed on 13 February 2014, the NSW Crime Commission sought orders against the plaintiff pursuant to ss 10A and 27 of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW). The application was supported by an affidavit sworn by Jonathan Lee Spark who was employed by the Crime Commission as Director, Financial Investigations. On 13 February 2014 his Honour Button J of this Court in an ex tempore judgment made orders pursuant to those sought by the summons, in particular, orders made pursuant to s 10A of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act.

2. Today the Commission has appeared in court in relation to a notice of motion that was filed on 28 February 2019 together with a supporting affidavit by John Hampden Blackburn-Hart who is a senior forensic accountant with the NSW Crime Commission seeking an order pursuant to s 12(1)(b)(ii) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act in respect of Giuseppe Nardi, in particular, that he be examined on oath before a registrar of the court concerning the affairs of the defendant including the nature and location of any property in which the defendant has an interest. A second order sought is that leave be granted to the plaintiff to obtain from the registry dates for the examination sought and any other order that the court finds appropriate.

3. In his affidavit Mr Blackburn-Hart sets out the basis for his belief that Mr Nardi has information that can assist the Commission in locating property belonging to the defendant that may come within the Criminal Assets Recovery Act.

4. I am informed by Ms Donnelly, who appears for the NSW Crime Commission, that the notice of motion was served upon Mr Nardi on 4 April 2019 and in a subsequent communication to the NSW Crime Commission he has indicated he does not oppose the making of the order. I am further informed that the legal representative of the defendant has communicated to the NSW Crime Commission that the defendant neither supports nor opposes the application.

5. Having regard to the material both within and annexed to the affidavit of Mr Blackburn-Hart I am satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for the suspicion that Mr Nardi can assist the Commission in the locating of relevant property. In those circumstances I am satisfied that the orders sought should be made and I make those orders accordingly.

**********

Decision last updated: 25 June 2019