State of Qld v Brooks & McCabe

The State of Queensland sought a proceeds assessment order and forfeiture of property from the respondents, Brooks and McCabe, under the Criminal Proceeds Confiscation Act 2002 (Qld). The respondents applied to exclude their property from forfeiture on the basis that it was not illegally acquired. The property in question was an apartment which the respondents argued was mostly derived from successful legitimate real estate investments. The State contended that the apartment was illegally acquired property. The central legal issues before the court were the meaning of "illegally acquired property" and "expenses or outgoings incurred…in relation to the illegal activity" under the Act, as well as whether the apartment was indeed illegally acquired property.

The court examined the legislative framework and case law to determine the meaning of the statutory terms. It considered whether the property was derived from illegal activities or if it was the result of legitimate business transactions. The court held that the apartment was not primarily derived from the respondents' legitimate business activities but rather from the proceeds of their criminal activities. The court concluded that the apartment was "illegally acquired property" as it was purchased with the proceeds of crime. The court also found that the respondents were unable to prove that the expenses related to the apartment were incurred in relation to a legitimate activity, thereby rejecting their argument that the apartment should be excluded from forfeiture.

The appeal by the State was allowed, and the sum of $84,999 was added to the proceeds assessment order made by the primary judge. The respondents were ordered to pay the State's costs of the appeal, which were to be assessed. The cross-appeal by the respondents was dismissed with costs.