New South Wales Consolidated Acts

CRIMINAL ASSETS RECOVERY ACT 1990 - SECT 16A

16A Restrictions on payment of legal expenses from restrained property

(1) The following restrictions apply to a restraining order making provision for the payment of any legal expenses of a person--

(a) no provision is to be made except to the extent (if any) that the Supreme Court is satisfied that the person cannot meet the expenses concerned out of the person's unrestrained property,

(b) no provision is to be made in relation to any particular interest in property if the Supreme Court is satisfied that the interest is illegally acquired property,

(b1) no provision is to be made in relation to any particular interest in property if the Supreme Court is satisfied that the interest is an available interest relating to serious crime use property or the interest is the subject of an application for a substituted serious crime use property declaration,

(c) no provision is to be made unless a Statement of Affairs disclosing all the person's interests in property and liabilities and verified on oath by the person has been filed with the Supreme Court,

(d) no provision is to be made unless the Supreme Court is satisfied that the person has taken all reasonable steps to bring all of the person's interests in property within the jurisdiction of the Court,

(e) any such provision must specify the particular interest in property out of which the expenses concerned may be met.

(1A) This section does not apply to or in respect of a provision of a restraining order made under section 10B (3) (b), with the consent of each person whose interests in property are subject to the restraining order, that is in the terms of an agreement negotiated between a person whose interests are subject to the restraining order and the Commission.

(2) A person's
"unrestrained property" is any interest in property of the person--

(a) that is not subject to a restraining order under this Act, or

(b) that the Supreme Court is satisfied is not within the Court's jurisdiction (whether or not it is subject to a restraining order under this Act), or

(c) that the Supreme Court is satisfied would not be available to satisfy a proceeds assessment order or unexplained wealth order against the person (assuming such an order were to be made against the person).