Proceedings under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) are neither criminal prosecutions nor civil suits, and the Act provides a statutory exception to witness immunity by focusing on conduct 'engaged in' rather than liability to punishment (per Beazley JA and Tobias JA; Hodgson JA disagreed). Section 6(2)(d) of the Act refers to categories of offences, not specific offences, so perjury committed with intent to pervert the course of justice may satisfy the concept of perverting the course of justice. Jones v Dunkel inferences and adverse credit findings on transcript evidence are inconsistent with the principles governing summary judgment applications. The question of whether witness immunity applies to proceeds of crime proceedings remains not fully settled given the disagreement between the judges.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 17 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 17 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.