NSW Crime Commission v Field [2004] NSWSC 1051

The respondent's conviction and punishment for contempt do not operate to discharge or render inoperative the examination order, as it was not limited in time and remains effective; granting liberty to the applicant to pursue examination does not constitute an abuse of process in the circumstances.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 10 November 2004
Procedural Posture: Civil / Post Judgment Application
Outcome: Liberty to approach Registrar for examination granted
Legal Topics: ['examination on Oath' 'restraining Orders' 'ancillary Orders' 'abuse of Process' 'contempt Proceedings']

['criminal Law' 'proceeds of Crime' 'contempt of Court'] ['examination on Oath' 'restraining Orders' 'ancillary Orders' 'abuse of Process' 'contempt 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 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Application

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether the examination order made under s 12(1) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 remains effective after the respondent's conviction for contempt for non-compliance" 'Whether further enforcement of the examination order or a new order would constitute an abuse of process']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Liberty to approach Registrar for examination granted

Orders

['The plaintiff has liberty to approach the Registrar to obtain a date for the examination on oath of the respondent pursuant to the order made by Simpson J on 4 July 2001.']