OFF THE WIRE
BY: Sean Fewster
Source: adelaidenow.com.au
THE first control order sought in the wake of last month's High Court savaging is to ban a Rebels bikie from pubs because of his "intolerable" behaviour.
Police lawyers today asked the Adelaide Magistrates Court to place a control order on alleged outlaw motorcyclist Jamie Brown.
Brown's lawyers, however, said the application - the first made since the High Court criticised the controversial laws - is unnecessary.
Dominic Agresta, for Brown, said his client had already been black-listed.
"This application amounts to a prohibition on him attending at any hotel or entertainment venue anywhere in this state," he said.
"But my client is already serving a barring order, under the Liquor Licensing Act, which prevents him from attending at 250 licensed premises around the state.
"There would be no utility in this court making a control order."
Last month, the High Court ruled section 14.1 of the control order law was invalid because it said a court "must" impose control orders whenever asked to by police.
Two of the seven judges criticised the legislation as a whole, calling it "repugnant".
Undeterred, Attorney-General John Rau vowed to seek control orders with parts of the law other than section 14.1.
The application against Brown has been filed under section 14.2.
That section's validity is the subject of a Supreme Court challenge later this month.
Mr Millard said that was appropriate.
"Police are saying Brown behaves in intolerable ways in hotels," he said.
"I consider it highly relevant that barring orders have already been made against Brown in more than 250 premises.
"(Evidence about that) may remove the need for an order, or it might show why an order is necessary."
He ordered the parties file documentation and return to court in three weeks.
Today Louise Kleinig, for police, told Magistrate Kym Millard he could impose a control order without hearing any evidence.
She conceded, however, he had "the discretion" to call for affidavits if he desired.