The NT drug trafficker declaration and forfeiture scheme under s 36A of the Misuse of Drugs Act (NT) and s 94(1) of the Criminal Property Forfeiture Act (NT) is constitutionally valid, surviving challenges under both the Kable principle and the just terms requirement of s 50(1) of the NT (Self-Government) Act 1978 (Cth). A restraining order under s 44(1)(a) does not cease to have effect merely because the triggering criminal charge has been finally determined before the drug trafficker declaration is made. The only ground of objection to such a restraining order under s 65(1) is that the person does not own or effectively control the property. The court left open whether the scope of restraining orders should be proportionate to the costs of deterring, detecting and dealing with the particular offender's criminal activities.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.