State of Queensland v Fewings

In the Supreme Court of Queensland, the State of Queensland filed an application against Wayne Malcolm Fewings under section 38(1)(c) of the Criminal Proceeds Confiscation Act 2002. The State sought an order for Timothy Andrew Stillwell to attend for examination by the Registrar of the Court. The application arose from a restraining order against Fewings, with the State aiming to examine Stillwell based on evidence suggesting he purchased drugs from Fewings. The evidence was limited to a transcript of a conversation recorded by a covert police officer, indicating that Stillwell had dealings with Fewings, but did not necessarily suggest significant knowledge of Fewings' affairs.

The legal issues before the court centred on whether the evidence was sufficient to justify the examination of Stillwell under section 38(1)(c) of the Act. The court needed to determine if there was any ground for thinking that Stillwell had knowledge of the information described in the subsection. Additionally, the court had to decide whether the order, if made, should relate to all the paragraphs (i) to (iii) of the subsection or if it could be made in relation to any one or more of those subparagraphs. The court also needed to consider the interpretation of the Act and whether it should be read disjunctively.

The court, after reviewing the evidence and the relevant provisions of the Act, concluded that the evidence was sufficient to warrant the examination of Stillwell about Fewings' affairs, albeit narrowly. The court held that an order could be made in relation to any one or more of the subparagraphs if there was evidence disclosing some ground for thinking that the person to be examined had some knowledge of the nature described in those subparagraphs. In this case, the court was only satisfied in relation to paragraph (i), and thus made an order for Stillwell to attend for examination and reserved costs.