Tannous v State of New South Wales

The applicant, Tannous, appealed to the New South Wales Court of Appeal against an extended supervision order made by the Common Law Division on 23 March 2020. The State of New South Wales was the respondent. The dispute concerned the validity of the extended supervision order, which was made under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) on the basis that Tannous posed an unacceptable risk of committing another serious offence.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the "unacceptable risk" of committing another serious offence, as contemplated by section 5B of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), must subsist throughout the entire duration of the extended supervision order. Relatedly, the Court considered the role of the objects clause of the Act as an aid to statutory construction and the application of the clear statement rule in relation to the right to liberty.

The Court reasoned that the statutory language and the objects of the Act did not require the unacceptable risk to be present at every moment during the period of the order. Instead, the focus was on the risk of future offending. The Court affirmed that while the right to liberty is fundamental, it is not of such a nature as to subvert the clear statutory power to make an extended supervision order where the conditions are met. The Court interpreted "unacceptable risk" in the context of the Act, noting that it implies a high degree of probability of future offending.

The Court granted the applicant leave to appeal but ultimately dismissed the appeal, upholding the extended supervision order.