The Court held that s 24(1)(a) of the Criminal Assets Confiscation Act 2005 ([name withheld]), in its application to a person proposed to be charged with a serious offence, is constitutionally valid and does not impair the institutional integrity of the court, as the proposal to charge exists independently of the Act as part of the ordinary prosecutorial process, the court retains a genuine adjudicative function, and the provision is materially distinguishable from the legislation invalidated in South Australia v [name withheld].
The full text is available to signed-in members.