R v Gilson [2017] NSWSC 989

R v Gilson [2017] NSWSC 989

The Court would not be closed because there was no statutory mandate requiring closure, the child witness's identity was protected by s 15A of the Children's (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), the witness would give evidence by audio-visual link, any questioning issues could be controlled under s 41 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), similar murder trials involving child witnesses had not required closure, and closing the Court without parliamentary mandate would be a very large step inconsistent with the public interest in open justice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding; Murder Trial / Procedural Ruling on Whether Evidence of a Child Witness Should Be Given in a Closed Court
Outcome
The Court was not closed for the child witness's evidence.
Legal Topics
['open Justice' 'closed Court' 'child Witness Evidence' 'audio Visual Link Evidence' 'non Publication of Identifying Material']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'court Procedure'] ['open Justice' 'closed Court' 'child Witness Evidence' 'audio Visual Link Evidence' 'non Publication of Identifying Material']

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

Criminal Proceeding; Murder Trial / Procedural Ruling on Whether Evidence of a Child Witness Should Be Given in a Closed Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence of the 15-year-old daughter of the deceased in a murder trial should be given in a closed court.' 'Whether a closed court was mandated by statute in the circumstances.' 'Whether the Court should exercise its power to close the Court despite the public interest in open justice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court would not be closed because there was no statutory mandate requiring closure, the child witness's identity was protected by s 15A of the Children's (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), the witness would give evidence by audio-visual link, any questioning issues could be controlled under s 41 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), similar murder trials involving child witnesses had not required closure, and closing the Court without parliamentary mandate would be a very large step inconsistent with the public interest in open justice.

Court Disposition

The Court was not closed for the child witness's evidence.

Orders

  • ['I do not propose to close the Court.']