Lawrence v NSW

[2020] NSWCA 248

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Constitutional Law (Cth)
2. › Chapter III
3. › Institutional integrity of State courts
4. › Kable principle
5. › Preventative detention orders
6. › Whether conferral of power to make continuing detention orders on Supreme Court impairs institutional integrity
7. › Whether detention must be consequential step in adjudication of criminal guilt
8. › Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW), ss 10, 34, 35, 41
1. Constitutional Law (Cth)
2. › Chapter III
3. › Institutional integrity of State courts
4. › Procedural fairness
5. › Rules of evidence
6. › Terrorism intelligence provisions
7. › Whether evidentiary and confidentiality provisions render proceedings procedurally unfair
8. › Whether terrorism intelligence regime incompatible with judicial process
9. › Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW), ss 39(3), 50, 59A, 59B, 59C, 61
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Departure from literal meaning
3. › Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW), s 39(4)
4. › Whether 'the order' refers to continuing detention order or extended supervision order
5. › Reading provision in context and having regard to purpose
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Legislative purpose
3. › Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW), s 10(1)(c)(ii)
4. › Whether necessary connection required between association or affiliation and advocacy of terrorist acts or violent extremism

Quick Take

Practitioners acting in proceedings under the Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW) should note that the Act has been upheld as constitutionally valid, and that s 10(1)(c)(ii) requires a connection between the association/affiliation and the advocacy of terrorist acts or violent extremism.