R v ED [2022] NSWDC 142

R v ED [2022] NSWDC 142

Access was granted only to documents for which privilege was not pressed or which had substantial probative value because they could reasonably bear on the PPC's mental condition, credibility or reliability at a time reasonably proximate to her first witness statement, and because the public interest in the accused's forensic ability to sow doubt about guilt outweighed the public interests in preserving confidentiality and protecting the PPC from harm. Access was denied to the remaining documents because they did not record relevant non-privileged material or, where privileged, did not have substantial probative value, often because they were irrelevant, remote in time, merely of limited...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding Involving Alleged Historical Sexual Assault Offences / Pre Trial Application by the Accused for Access to Documents Produced on Subpoena, Involving Sexual Assault Communications Privilege
Outcome
Access granted in part and otherwise denied.
Legal Topics
['historical Sexual Assault Offences' 'subpoenas' 'sexual Assault Communications Privilege' 'protected Confidences' 'access to Counselling or Clinical Records' 'mental Health Records of Complainant' 'suppression and Anonymisation']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['historical Sexual Assault Offences' 'subpoenas' 'sexual Assault Communications Privilege' 'protected Confidences' 'access to Counselling or Clinical Records' 'mental Health Records of Complainant' 'suppression and Anonymisation']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Proceeding Involving Alleged Historical Sexual Assault Offences / Pre Trial Application by the Accused for Access to Documents Produced on Subpoena, Involving Sexual Assault Communications Privilege

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether documents produced by the Cairns and Hinterland Hospital and Health Service recorded protected confidences under s 296 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW).' 'Whether any privileged documents had substantial probative value under s 299D(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW).' 'Whether the information or matters to which the protected confidences related were otherwise available under s 299D(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW).' 'Whether the public interest in preserving confidentiality and protecting the PPC from harm was substantially outweighed by the public interest in admitting the material into evidence under s 299D(1)(c) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW).' 'Whether access should be granted to the accused to inspect documents in Packet 12 produced on subpoena.']

Ratio Decidendi

Access was granted only to documents for which privilege was not pressed or which had substantial probative value because they could reasonably bear on the PPC's mental condition, credibility or reliability at a time reasonably proximate to her first witness statement, and because the public interest in the accused's forensic ability to sow doubt about guilt outweighed the public interests in preserving confidentiality and protecting the PPC from harm. Access was denied to the remaining documents because they did not record relevant non-privileged material or, where privileged, did not have substantial probative value, often because they were irrelevant, remote in time, merely of limited...

Court Disposition

Access granted in part and otherwise denied.

Orders

  • ["Access is granted to the accused to the documents in Packet 12 produced on subpoena by the Cairns and Hinterland Hospital and Health Service, identified as Tabs 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 18, 25, 37, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50 partly as indicated, 52, 57 and 59, as flagged in the folder constructed by the PPC's legal...