The word 'may' in s 16(1) of the Crimes (Serious Sex Offenders) Act 2006 confers a true judicial discretion, but the discretion at the interim stage is to be exercised by reference to the unchallenged evidence of risk, not by predicting the likely final order. Delay in bringing the application is not a relevant consideration where no adjournment is sought and the evidence is unchallenged. An offender's refusal to participate in rehabilitation programs is a factor supporting interim detention, not a reason to refuse it.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 188 later cases that cite this judgment.
15 of the 188 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.