New South Wales Crime Commission v Dibley

[2026] NSWSC 821

Supreme Court of NSW

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

1. Crime
2. › Confiscation of proceeds of crime
3. › Restraining orders under Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW)
1. Crime
2. › Confiscation of proceeds of crime
3. › Restraining order over property outside NSW — geographical nexus — external serious crime related activity
1. Crime
2. › Confiscation of proceeds of crime
3. › Ancillary orders under s 12 — examination and verified statement — refusal to make ex parte
1. Civil procedure
2. › Ex parte applications
3. › Duty of disclosure — obligation to draw attention to adverse authorities

Where the suspected serious crime related activity is not 'external serious crime related activity' (i.e. it has a geographical nexus to NSW under s 5 of the Crimes Act 1900), the extended definition of 'property' in s 7(2A) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 permits restraining orders over property outside New South Wales, even where the defendant is not domiciled in NSW.
A party making an ex parte application has an obligation to draw the Court's attention to decisions which bear adversely on the relief sought; failure to do so in the supporting evidence or submissions is undesirable, and if the plaintiff contends a particular case warrants ex parte ancillary orders under s 12, this should be addressed in the evidence or accompanying submissions.
Savings in Court time and cost to the plaintiff are not, without more, a sufficient reason to make ancillary orders under s 12 of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 on an ex parte basis, consistent with prior authority declining to make such orders ex parte.