State of New South Wales v Costigan (ISO extension)

[2021] NSWSC 1585

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

State of New South Wales v Costigan (ISO extension) [2021] NSWSC 1585

Hearing dates:

On the papers – in Chambers

Date of orders:

7 December 2021

Decision date:

07 December 2021

Jurisdiction:

Common Law

Before:

Wilson J as Duty Judge

Decision:

1. Pursuant to sections 10C(1) and (2) of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (“the Act”), the interim supervision order made by Justice Dhanji on 28 October 2021 is renewed for a further period of 28 days commencing from midnight on 8 December 2021.

2. Pursuant to section 11 of the Act, the defendant, for the period of the interim supervision order as renewed, is to comply with the conditions set out in the schedule to the orders made by Justice Dhanji on 28 October 2021.

Catchwords:

HIGH RISK OFFENDER — extension of interim order sought — extension neither consented to nor opposed by defendant — order made on the papers in chambers

Legislation Cited:

Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act2006 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

State of New South Wales v Costigan (Preliminary) [2021] NSWSC 1386

Category:

Procedural rulings

Parties:

State of New South Wales (Plaintiff)
Brian Costigan (Defendant)

Representation:

Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor’s Office (Plaintiff)
Legal Aid Commission (Defendant)

File Number(s):

2021/00210974-1

Publication restriction:

None

Judgment

1. HER HONOUR: Today, this matter came before me in Chambers as Duty Judge, on the application of the plaintiff. The State of New South Wales, the plaintiff in these proceedings, seeks an extension of an interim supervision order (“ISO”) that was imposed upon the defendant by Dhanji J on 28 October 2021, pursuant to s 10A and s 10C of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) (“the Act”). The defendant neither consents to nor opposes an extension of the order he is presently subject to.

2. The Court has the power to extend the ISO as provided by s 10C(2) of the Act. This will be the first such extension of the order.

3. Additional to the temporal restriction on the extension of an ISO, contained in s 10C(2) is the requirement that the Court is satisfied of those things set out in s 10A of the Act.

4. To that end I have considered the supporting documentation tendered to the Court at the preliminary hearing of the matter in October 2021, and read the judgment of Dhanji J: State of New South Wales v Costigan (Preliminary) [2021] NSWSC 1386. For the reasons there expressed by his Honour I am satisfied that the defendant’s current custody or supervision will expire before these proceedings are determined, and that the matters alleged in the supporting documentation would, if proved, justify the making of an extended supervision order.

5. I note that the defendant, whilst not consenting to the extension, does not oppose it.

6. The orders sought by the plaintiff will be made from 8 December 2021, and the draft Short Minutes of Order provided by the State will be appropriately endorsed.

**********

Decision last updated: 15 December 2021