The Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police v W

The Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police sought an adjournment of the defendants’ applications for exclusion orders and for a stay of forfeiture proceedings pending a criminal trial. The defendants sought to exclude their evidence from the proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) on the basis that it would prejudice their defence in the criminal trial. The court had to decide whether the defendants’ evidence in the proceeds of crime proceedings would prejudice their defence in the criminal trial and whether the potential prejudice could be overcome by means other than a stay.

The court found that the defendants’ evidence in the proceeds of crime proceedings would prejudice their defence in the criminal trial. The court also found that the potential prejudice could not be overcome by means other than a stay. The court considered the factors in section 319 of the Proceeds of Crime Act and found that it was in the interests of justice to order a stay. The court noted that the amendments to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) after the decision in Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police v Zhao [2015] HCA 5; 225 CLR 46 provided some indication that Parliament did not intend to intrude on the Court’s assessment of the “interests of justice” except where specifically indicated by the words of the Amending Act.

The court granted a stay of the proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) pending the outcome of the criminal trial. The court ordered that the stay would be made until the end of August 2016, so that if there is any disruption to the criminal trial, the various matters to be taken into account could be revisited. The court noted that the cost and inconvenience to the Commonwealth of retaining property to which the proceeding relates and being unable to expeditiously realise its proceeds would not be substantial if the stay was limited to a few months. The court also noted that the risk of the plaintiff suffering any prejudice in relation to the conduct of the proceeds proceedings if they were stayed was minimal.

The final orders of the court were that the defendants’ applications for exclusion orders and for a stay of forfeiture proceedings were granted. The proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) were stayed until the end of August 2016. The court noted that the stay would be reviewed if the criminal trial was disrupted or if there were any changes in the circumstances of the case.