The Court held that it lacked power to make an interim supervision order under s 27 of the Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW) because the defendant was no longer an 'eligible offender' once the District Court pronounced orders quashing the sentence of imprisonment and substituting a conditional release order, even though those orders had not yet been entered on JusticeLink. The Court held that District Court orders are effective upon pronouncement in open court, not upon entry, and that on the evidence the District Court judge had not withdrawn, stayed or corrected the pronounced orders. On the separate question of statutory construction, the Court indicated it would have found that a sentence quashed on appeal could satisfy the requirement in s 27(a) that 'custody or supervision' will 'expire', as Parliament did not intend 'expires' to be confined to effluxion of time — but this point was not determinative given the finding on eligible offender status.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.