Australia, July 25 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on June 25:

1. These proceedings were commenced on 28 May 2015 with the filing of a summons by the New South Wales Crime Commission as plaintiff and Mr Sean Anthony Smith as defendant.

2. The summons was heard on the same day by Hamill J, who made a number of orders pursuant to s 10A of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) (Crime Commission v Sean Anthony Smith [2015] NSWSC 688). At the core of the orders was the belief "that the defendant engaged in serious crime related activity" connected to illicit drugs.

3. On 11 December 2018, the plaintiff filed an amended summons seeking orders under the Confiscation of Proceeds of Crimes Act 1989 (NSW).

4. On 5 February 2020, a Registrar made orders under s 12(1)(b)(i) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act for the examination of the defendant.

5. The defendant was examined on 18 February 2020. In the course of the examination, the defendant made statements concerning a Mr John Glasheen.

6. Mr Glasheen had already been spoken to by Mr Nigel Robinson, an employee of the New South Wales Crime Commission, on 10 May 2016. In the course of that conversation Mr Glasheen said that, inter alia, he was a former friend of the defendant's family, and that he had borrowed $120,000 in cash from the defendant over a period of two years. He said that he paid the loan back, together with interest, also over two years. The total amount paid back including the interest was $135,000.

7. When the defendant was examined on 18 February 2020, he said, in respect of the loan described by Mr Glasheen, that he had not made a loan to Mr Glasheen and he had not, or at least did not recall, receiving $135,000 from Mr Glasheen.

8. Mr Robinson inspected documents that had been provided by the ANZ Bank on 17 June 2016, which revealed that between 5 July 2013 and 7 April 2015 Mr Glasheen made 11 separate payments to the defendant totalling $135,000.

9. Clearly there is an inconsistency between what Mr Glasheen told Mr Robinson and what the defendant said during his examination.

10. Because of this, and other inconsistencies the plaintiff filed a notice of motion on 12 February 2025, seeking an order that Mr Glasheen be "examined on oath before a Registrar of the Court concerning the affairs of Sean Anthony Smith including the nature and location of any property in which Sean Anthony Smith has an interest."

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/197a4e9e4ccdf64057d66596)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.