NSW Crime Commission v Ilic [2018] NSWSC 1966

NSW Crime Commission v Ilic [2018] NSWSC 1966

The affidavit of Katy Elaine Bourne established reasonable grounds for her suspicion that Branimir Ilic had engaged in serious crime related activity by dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime, including circumstances in which he was found travelling with over a million dollars in cash and declined to identify the source or intended recipient. Because the statutory requirements were satisfied, the Court was required to make the restraining order, and the unusual lack of information about the source of the cash made it unnecessary and inappropriate to require notice to any person.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Restraining Orders Under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (nsw) / Ex Parte Procedural Ruling; Orders Made on 29 November 2018
Outcome
Leave granted and orders 1 to 9 in the short minutes of order made.
Legal Topics
['restraining Orders' 'examination Order' 'property Suspected of Being Proceeds of Crime' 'notice to Interested Persons']
['proceeds of Crime' 'criminal Assets Recovery'] ['restraining Orders' 'examination Order' 'property Suspected of Being Proceeds of Crime' 'notice to Interested Persons']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Restraining Orders Under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (nsw) / Ex Parte Procedural Ruling; Orders Made on 29 November 2018

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should make a restraining order against Branimir Ilic under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW).' 'Whether it was necessary or appropriate to require the NSW Crime Commission to give notice of the application to a sufficiently interested person under s 10A(4) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW).' 'Whether an examination order should be made against Branimir Ilic under s 12(1)(b)(i) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

The affidavit of Katy Elaine Bourne established reasonable grounds for her suspicion that Branimir Ilic had engaged in serious crime related activity by dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime, including circumstances in which he was found travelling with over a million dollars in cash and declined to identify the source or intended recipient. Because the statutory requirements were satisfied, the Court was required to make the restraining order, and the unusual lack of information about the source of the cash made it unnecessary and inappropriate to require notice to any person.

Court Disposition

Leave granted and orders 1 to 9 in the short minutes of order made.

Orders

  • ['Leave granted to the plaintiff to file in court the Summons and Statement of Facts and Circumstances dated 29 November 2018 and the affidavit of Katie Elaine Bourne sworn 28 November 2018.' 'Pursuant to section 10A of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 no person (other than any registered mortgagee dealing with...