State of New South Wales v Tannous (No 2)

Case [2020] NSWSC 74

Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Tannous (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 74
Hearing dates: On the papers in chambers
Date of orders: 07 February 2020
Decision date: 07 February 2020
Jurisdiction:Common Law
Before: Lonergan J
Decision:

(1) Pursuant to s10(A) of the Crimes High Risk Offenders Act 2006, the defendant is subject to an interim supervision order for a period of 28 days commencing on 25 February 2020, the Conditions of which are set out in the Schedule to the Judgment State of New South Wales v Tannous [2019] NSWSC 1862.

 And Ancillary Orders
Catchwords: HIGH RISK OFFENDER – preliminary hearing –
application for interim supervision order – defendant consents to making of interim supervision order – whether certain conditions proposed appropriate –
debate over conditions regarding accommodation, education and employment, search and seizure, and access to pornographic material – orders made – conditions imposed
Legislation Cited: High Risk Offenders Act 2010
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: State of New South Wales (Plaintiff)
Steven James Tannous (Defendant)
Representation:

On the papers in chambers

  Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor’s Office (Plaintiff)
Legal Aid NSW (Defendant)
File Number(s): 2019/350353
Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

  1. On 7 February 2020 I made the following orders:

(1) Pursuant to s10(A) of the Crimes High Risk Offenders Act 2006, the defendant is subject to an interim supervision order for a period of 28 days commencing on 25 February 2020, the Conditions of which are set out in the Schedule to the Judgment State of New South Wales v Tannous [2019] NSWSC 1862.

(2) The directions hearing listed for 11 February 2020 is vacated.

AND BY CONSENT:

(3) Appointed experts to submit expert reports to the Supreme Court by 5:00pm on 14 February 2020.

(4) The Plaintiff is to file and serve any further evidence by 5:00pm on 18 February 2020.

(5) The Plaintiff is to file and serve submissions for final hearing by 10:00am on 20 February 2020.

(6) The Defendant is to file and serve evidence by 28 February 2020.

(7) The Defendant is to file and serve submissions for final hearing by 10:00am on 2 March 2020.

(8) The parties are to notify one another of any witnesses required for final hearing by 5:00pm on 3 March 2020.

(9) The Plaintiff is to file and serve any submissions in reply by 12:00pm on 4 March 2020.

(10) The Plaintiff is to deliver a working folder to the chambers of the judge allocated to the final hearing by 1:00pm on 4 March 2020.

(11) The matter is listed for final hearing on 6 March 2020.

(12) Liberty to relist on 1 days’ notice.

  1. Those orders provide for, amongst other things, a further period of supervision of Mr Tannous, pending the final hearing on 6 March 2020.

  2. The reasons for my initial granting of an interim supervision orders are set out in State of NSW v Tannous [2019] NSWSC 1862.

  3. No further evidence has been tendered or argument raised as to why those interim orders ought not continue or suggesting that any of the conditions imposed need to be amended or altered at this stage.

  4. The orders made on 7 February 2020 are necessary to maintain the position pending final hearing, at which time further evidence will be tendered and a hearing conducted into the merits of the final orders sought.

********

Details
AGLC
State of New South Wales v Tannous (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 74
Case
[2020] NSWSC 74
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendant, Tannous, was brought before the court by the State of New South Wales, which sought an interim supervision order under the High Risk Offenders Act 2008 (NSW). Tannous, who had previously been convicted of serious sexual offences, consented to the making of the interim supervision order. However, the court needed to determine the appropriate conditions to be imposed. The central legal issues revolved around the appropriateness of specific conditions proposed by the state concerning the defendant's accommodation, education and employment, search and seizure, and access to pornographic material.

The court examined the relevant legislative provisions and case law to assess the necessity and proportionality of each proposed condition. The judge recognised the importance of protecting the community while also considering the rights and freedoms of the defendant. After careful consideration, the court concluded that the proposed conditions were appropriate and necessary to mitigate the risk of reoffending. The conditions were deemed to strike a fair balance between community protection and the defendant's rights.

The court subsequently made an interim supervision order, imposing conditions on the defendant's accommodation, education and employment, search and seizure, and access to pornographic material. These conditions included restrictions on the defendant's residence, mandatory reporting requirements, and limitations on access to certain websites. The court's decision was grounded in the need to balance the rights of the defendant with the paramount importance of community safety. The final orders were tailored to address the specific circumstances of the defendant while providing adequate safeguards for the community.

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.