Booth v Thorne (No 2) [2020] FCA 1196

Booth v Thorne (No 2) [2020] FCA 1196

The requirements of ss 104.12 and 104.12A having been met, and the obligations imposed being necessary and appropriate, the interim control order against the respondent is confirmed, in the agreed form.

Parties
Applicant: Sandra Booth; Respondent: Shayden Jamil Thorne
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Confirmation of Interim Control Order / Final Orders Confirming Interim Order
Outcome
Interim control order confirmed with variations agreed between parties.
Legal Topics
Control Orders, Terrorism, Confirmation of Interim Control Order

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sandra Booth

Applicant

Shayden Jamil Thorne

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Confirmation of Interim Control Order / Final Orders Confirming Interim Order

  1. 1 Whether requirements of ss 104.12 and 104.12A of the Criminal Code were satisfied
  2. 2 Whether circumstances justify confirmation of interim control order against respondent
  3. 3 Whether obligations, prohibitions and restrictions imposed are reasonably necessary, appropriate, and adapted for purposes of s 104.4(1)(d)

Ratio Decidendi

The requirements of ss 104.12 and 104.12A having been met, and the obligations imposed being necessary and appropriate, the interim control order against the respondent is confirmed, in the agreed form.

Court Disposition

Interim control order confirmed with variations agreed between parties.

Orders

  • Interim control order made 6 March 2020 and varied 24 June 2020 is confirmed with further variations as set out in Annexure A.
  • Confirmed control order relates to Shayden Jamil Thorne.