Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:C2024C00749:section:46:p2
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:C2024C00749
Segment Type: section
Provision Reference: s 46 (pt 2/9)
Character Range: 272029–274710

(f) how much the use of such methods would be likely to prejudice the investigation by the agency of the offence or offences, whether because of delay or for any other reason; and
 (fa) in relation to an application by an interception agency of Victoria—any submissions made by the Victorian PIM under section 44A to the Judge or nominated ART member; and
 (g) in relation to an application by an interception agency of Queensland—any submissions made by the Queensland PIM under section 45 to the Judge or nominated ART member.
 (3) The Judge or nominated ART member must not issue a warrant under subsection (1) in a case in which subparagraph (1)(d)(ii) applies unless he or she is satisfied that:
 (a) the agency has exhausted all other practicable methods of identifying the telecommunications services used, or likely to be used, by the person involved in the offence or offences referred to in paragraph (1)(d); or
 (b) interception of communications made to or from a telecommunications service used or likely to be used by that person would not otherwise be possible.

Warrant sought for Part 5.3 supervisory order
 (4) If a Part 5.3 warrant agency applies to an eligible Judge or nominated ART member for a warrant in respect of a telecommunications service and the Judge or nominated ART member is satisfied, on the basis of the information given to the Judge or nominated ART member under this Part in connection with the application, that:
 (a) Division 3 has been complied with in relation to the application; and
 (b) in the case of a telephone application—because of urgent circumstances, it was necessary to make the application by telephone; and
 (c) there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that a particular person is using, or is likely to use, the service; and
 (d) either:
 (i) a Part 5.3 supervisory order is in force in relation to the particular person; or
 (ii) a Part 5.3 supervisory order is in force in relation to another person, and the particular person is likely to communicate with the other person using the service; and
 (e) information that would be likely to be obtained by intercepting under a warrant communications made to or from the service would be likely to substantially assist in connection with:
 (i) achieving a Part 5.3 object; or
 (ii) determining whether the Part 5.3 supervisory order, or any succeeding Part 5.3 supervisory order, has been, or is being, complied with; and
 (f) having regard to the matters referred to in subsection (5), and to no other matters, the Judge or nominated ART member should issue a warrant authorising such communications to be intercepted;
the Judge or nominated ART member may, in his or her