New South Wales Crime Commission v Jolley [2018] NSWSC 2029

New South Wales Crime Commission v Jolley [2018] NSWSC 2029

Affidavit and police facts provide reasonable grounds for suspicion that defendant engaged in serious crime-related activity; ex parte restraining and related orders appropriate under the Act.

Parties
Plaintiff: New South Wales Crime Commission; Defendant: Bennett John Jolley
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Asset Recovery / Ex Parte Application for Restraining Order
Outcome
Orders made as proposed, including restraining order, assets forfeiture order, and unexplained wealth order.
Legal Topics
Criminal Assets Recovery, Restraining Order, Ex Parte Proceedings
Criminal Law Criminal Assets Recovery Restraining Order Ex Parte Proceedings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

New South Wales Crime Commission

Plaintiff

Bennett John Jolley

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Asset Recovery / Ex Parte Application for Restraining Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether restraining order should be made ex parte under Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether there are reasonable grounds for suspicion of serious crime-related activity by Bennett John Jolley

Ratio Decidendi

Affidavit and police facts provide reasonable grounds for suspicion that defendant engaged in serious crime-related activity; ex parte restraining and related orders appropriate under the Act.

Court Disposition

Orders made as proposed, including restraining order, assets forfeiture order, and unexplained wealth order.

Orders

  • Restraining order under Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) s 10A
  • Assets forfeiture order under Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) s 22