The Court held that the statutory precondition in s 27(a) of the Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW) for making an interim supervision order — that it 'appears to the Court' that the offender's custody 'will expire' before proceedings are determined — requires realistic inevitability of release, not merely a possibility arising from a pending severity appeal. Following Farhat [2026] NSWSC 19, the Court refused the ISO because the outcome of the District Court appeal was unpredictable, while noting that the threshold under s 24(5) was met and expert appointments were mandatory. The Court expressly identified a legislative gap and suggested Parliament amend s 27(a) by replacing 'will' with 'may' to cover contingent release scenarios.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.