State of New South Wales v Anderson (No 5)

Case [2016] NSWSC 828

Supreme Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Anderson (No 5) [2016] NSWSC 828
Hearing dates:20 June 2016
Date of orders: 21 June 2016
Decision date: 21 June 2016
Jurisdiction:Common Law
Before: Schmidt J
Decision:

(1) An order pursuant to s 10C(2) of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 ("the Act") that the interim supervision order made on 27 April 2016 (with effect from 28 April 2016), and renewed on 23 May 2016, be further renewed for a period of 28 days to take effect from 11:00am on 23 June 2016 and to expire at 11:00am on 21 July 2016.
(2) An order pursuant to s 11 of the Act, that for the period of the interim supervision order as renewed, the defendant is to comply with the conditions in the Schedule to the Orders made by the Court of Appeal on 27 April 2016.
(3)   Liberty to apply on two days' notice.

Catchwords: HIGH RISK OFFENDER – notice of motion – application for renewal of interim supervision order – orders made
Legislation Cited: Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006
Cases Cited: Anderson v State of New South Wales [2016] NSWCA 86
State of New South Wales v Anderson (No 4) [2015] NSWSC 1970
State of New South Wales v Anderson (Supreme Court (NSW), Fagan J, 23 May 2016, unrep)
Category:Procedural and other rulings
Parties: State of New South Wales (Plaintiff)
Ronald Anderson (Defendant)
Representation:

Counsel:
DT Kell (Plaintiff)

  Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor’s Office (Plaintiff)
Legal Aid NSW (Defendant)
File Number(s):2015/291356
Publication restriction:None

Judgment

  1. By motion filed yesterday the State of New South Wales seeks orders under s 10C and s 11 of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act2006 (NSW) for renewal of interim supervision orders made on 27 April 2016. The motion is supported by an affidavit sworn by Mr Camporeale, a solicitor employed in the office of the Crown Solicitor, as well as reports of Dr Andrew Ellis of 7 June 2016, Dr Richard Furst of 9 June 2016 and Dr Jeremy O’Dea of 14 June 2016.

  2. Orders were originally made by Wilson J on 14 December 2015 (see State of New South Wales v Anderson (No 4) [2015] NSWSC 1970). The Court of Appeal upheld an appeal from that decision, making, however, interim supervision orders with effect from 28 April 2016 (see Anderson v State of New South Wales [2016] NSWCA 86). They were extended by Fagan J on 23 May 2016 (see State of New South Wales v Anderson (Supreme Court (NSW), Fagan J, unrep). The matter is listed for further hearing before Wilson J on 24 June 2016.

  3. The parties now ask the Court to make further consent orders, extending the interim orders until after the impending hearing. I am satisfied on the evidence that orders in the terms agreed should be made. Those orders will enable the orderly hearing of the outstanding aspect of the case, in circumstances where, unless the order is made, Mr Anderson’s supervision will expire before the proceedings are determined, and where the matters alleged in the supporting documentation would, if proved, justify the making of an extended supervision order.

Orders

  1. Accordingly, I make the following orders sought:

  1. An order pursuant to s 10C(2) of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 ("the Act") that the interim supervision order made on 27 April 2016 (with effect from 28 April 2016), and renewed on 23 May 2016, be further renewed for a period of 28 days to take effect from 11:00am on 23 June 2016 and to expire at 11:00am on 21 July 2016.

  2. An order pursuant to s 11 of the Act, that for the period of the interim supervision order as renewed, the defendant is to comply with the conditions in the Schedule to the Orders made by the Court of Appeal on 27 April 2016.

  3. Liberty to apply on two days' notice.

**********

Amendments

21 June 2016 - Amendment to [2] "on 28 April 2016" changed to "with effect from 28 April 2016"

Details
AGLC
State of New South Wales v Anderson (No 5) [2016] NSWSC 828
Case
[2016] NSWSC 828
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the State of New South Wales and an individual, Anderson. The dispute centred on the application for the renewal of an interim supervision order against Anderson, who was classified as a high-risk offender. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The state sought to extend the interim supervision order to maintain control over Anderson, given his history and potential risk to the community.

The court needed to determine whether the criteria for renewing the interim supervision order were met. It considered whether there was sufficient evidence to demonstrate that Anderson still posed a significant risk to public safety. The court also examined the necessity of continued supervision to prevent any potential harm that Anderson might cause.

The court found that the evidence presented by the state was compelling. It concluded that Anderson's past conduct and potential for future offending warranted the renewal of the interim supervision order. The judge highlighted the importance of preventing any risk to the community, especially in light of Anderson's history. The court, therefore, granted the application for the renewal of the interim supervision order, ensuring that Anderson would continue to be subject to strict monitoring and control.

The court ordered the renewal of the interim supervision order against Anderson for a specified period. This decision was made to maintain the safety of the public, given the risk posed by Anderson. The order included specific conditions that Anderson must adhere to during the period of supervision.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.