Booth v Naizmand [2020] FCA 244

Booth v Naizmand [2020] FCA 244

The court was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Mr Naizmand has been convicted in Australia of terrorism-related offences, and that each of the obligations, prohibitions, and restrictions imposed by the interim control order is reasonably necessary, appropriate, and adapted for protecting the public, preventing the provision of support or facilitation of terrorist acts, and preventing support or facilitation of hostile activity in a foreign country. Accordingly, the interim control order was granted.

Parties
Applicant: Sandra Booth; Respondent: Ahmad Saiyer Naizmand
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Control Order / Determination of Application and Issuance of Interim Control Order
Outcome
Application for interim control order granted, with one adjustment in favour of respondent.
Legal Topics
Control Orders, Terrorism, Interim Orders
Criminal Law Control Orders Terrorism Interim Orders

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sandra Booth

Applicant

Ahmad Saiyer Naizmand

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Interim Control Order / Determination of Application and Issuance of Interim Control Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the preconditions for making an interim control order under s 104.4 of the Criminal Code are satisfied
  2. 2 Whether obligations, prohibitions, and restrictions are reasonably necessary, appropriate and adapted for statutory purpose

Ratio Decidendi

The court was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Mr Naizmand has been convicted in Australia of terrorism-related offences, and that each of the obligations, prohibitions, and restrictions imposed by the interim control order is reasonably necessary, appropriate, and adapted for protecting the public, preventing the provision of support or facilitation of terrorist acts, and preventing support or facilitation of hostile activity in a foreign country. Accordingly, the interim control order was granted.

Court Disposition

Application for interim control order granted, with one adjustment in favour of respondent.

Orders

  • An interim control order be made pursuant to s 104.4 of the Criminal Code in the terms set out in the Schedule.
  • The confirmation hearing be listed for a case management hearing at 9.00 am on 20 March 2020, or other date as fixed by the Court.