AMI Australia Holdings Pty Ltd v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2009] NSWSC 1290

AMI Australia Holdings Pty Ltd v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2009] NSWSC 1290

Because the relief sought would be rendered futile if the proceedings were conducted in open court, and alternatives such as a non-publication order or veiled speech would not satisfactorily prevent publication of the imputations or serve the interests of justice, publication would defeat the ends of justice and the proceedings should be conducted in the absence of the public under Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 71(b) and (f).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Application to Conduct Proceedings in a Closed Court in Proceedings Seeking Injunctive Relief to Restrain Publication of Imputations on the Basis of Breach of Confidence and Injurious Falsehood / Ex Tempore Judgment on Application to Conduct Proceedings in Closed Court
Outcome
Proceedings to be conducted in closed court
Legal Topics
['closed Court' 'suppression Orders' 'open Justice' 'breach of Confidence' 'injurious Falsehood' 'injunctive Relief']
['practice and Procedure' 'equity'] ['closed Court' 'suppression Orders' 'open Justice' 'breach of Confidence' 'injurious Falsehood' 'injunctive Relief']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application to Conduct Proceedings in a Closed Court in Proceedings Seeking Injunctive Relief to Restrain Publication of Imputations on the Basis of Breach of Confidence and Injurious Falsehood / Ex Tempore Judgment on Application to Conduct Proceedings in Closed Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proceedings should be conducted in the absence of the public under Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 71(b) and (f).' 'Whether conducting the proceedings in open court would defeat the ends of justice by making known the imputations sought to be restrained.' 'Whether a non-publication order or veiled speech would be a satisfactory alternative to a closed court.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the relief sought would be rendered futile if the proceedings were conducted in open court, and alternatives such as a non-publication order or veiled speech would not satisfactorily prevent publication of the imputations or serve the interests of justice, publication would defeat the ends of justice and the proceedings should be conducted in the absence of the public under Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 71(b) and (f).

Court Disposition

Proceedings to be conducted in closed court

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to Civil Procedure Act, s 71(b) and (f), the proceedings be conducted in the absence of the public.']