Under s 330(4)(a) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth), an account holder whose bank account is used for cuckoo smurfing is not a 'third party' (majority view) because an element of the structuring offence is the credits to their account; and even if they were a third party (McColl JA's view), they cannot satisfy the 'sufficient consideration' requirement where they provided no consideration to the unknown depositors, nor the 'reasonable suspicion' requirement where they were aware of the pattern of multiple small deposits.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 8 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 8 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.