Booth v Khazaal (No 2) [2020] FCA 1528

Booth v Khazaal (No 2) [2020] FCA 1528

The Court confirmed the interim control order because the statutory preconditions in s 104.14(1A) had been satisfied, including service and notification requirements under ss 104.12 and 104.12A(2), and the evidence and submissions before the Court established on the balance of probabilities that Mr Khazaal had been convicted in Australia of an offence relating to terrorism and that each obligation, prohibition and restriction in the order was reasonably necessary and reasonably appropriate and adapted for the statutory protective and preventative purposes in s 104.4(1)(d).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Control Order Application / Application for Confirmation of Interim Control Order Pursuant to S 104.14(7) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (cth)
Outcome
Application granted; interim control order confirmed without variation under s 104.14(7)(c) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), with the orders made on 26 August 2020 varied to insert paragraph 2.1A.
Legal Topics
['control Orders' 'interim Control Order Confirmation' 'terrorism Related Offence' 'obligations, Prohibitions and Restrictions']
['criminal Law' 'counter Terrorism'] ['control Orders' 'interim Control Order Confirmation' 'terrorism Related Offence' 'obligations, Prohibitions and Restrictions']

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

Criminal Law Control Order Application / Application for Confirmation of Interim Control Order Pursuant to S 104.14(7) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (cth)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the conditions in s 104.14(1A) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) for the Court to confirm an interim control order were satisfied.' 'Whether ss 104.12 and 104.12A(2) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) had been complied with in relation to service of documents and provision of information to the respondent.' 'Whether the Court was satisfied on the balance of probabilities as mentioned in ss 104.4(1)(c) and 104.4(1)(d) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth).' 'Whether the interim control order should be confirmed without variation under s 104.14(7)(c) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court confirmed the interim control order because the statutory preconditions in s 104.14(1A) had been satisfied, including service and notification requirements under ss 104.12 and 104.12A(2), and the evidence and submissions before the Court established on the balance of probabilities that Mr Khazaal had been convicted in Australia of an offence relating to terrorism and that each obligation, prohibition and restriction in the order was reasonably necessary and reasonably appropriate and adapted for the statutory protective and preventative purposes in s 104.4(1)(d).

Court Disposition

Application granted; interim control order confirmed without variation under s 104.14(7)(c) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), with the orders made on 26 August 2020 varied to insert paragraph 2.1A.

Orders

  • ['The orders made on 26 August 2020 be varied to insert paragraph 2.1A, a paragraph inserted after paragraph 2.1, which reads as follows: Annexure 98 of Annexure SB-03 of the 5 August 2020 affidavit of Sandra Booth, at pages 2745 to 2854.' 'Pursuant to s 104.14(7)(c) of the Criminal Code, being the Schedule to the...