REGINA v ROBINSON [2000] NSWSC 1157

REGINA v ROBINSON [2000] NSWSC 1157

Section 11(1) of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 did not apply because the offender, although a child at the time of the crime, was not a child when the criminal proceedings were on foot or at least when they commenced; accordingly authorisation under s 11(4B) was unnecessary.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 October 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings / Judgment on Application Concerning Publication or Broadcasting of Offender's Name
Outcome
Application declined; the Court held that s 11 did not apply and, alternatively, would have authorised publication or broadcasting of the offender's name under s 11(4B).
Legal Topics
["publication or Broadcasting of Offender's Name" 'non Publication of Names of Children in Criminal Proceedings' 'public Interest in Open Justice' 'children (criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 S 11']
['criminal Law'] ["publication or Broadcasting of Offender's Name" 'non Publication of Names of Children in Criminal Proceedings' 'public Interest in Open Justice' 'children (criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 S 11']

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 Proceedings / Judgment on Application Concerning Publication or Broadcasting of Offender's Name

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether s 11(1) of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 prohibited publication or broadcasting of the offender's name where the offender was a child at the time of the crime but not a child when criminal proceedings were on foot or commenced." "Whether, if s 11 applied, the Court should authorise publication or broadcasting of the offender's name under s 11(4B) of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987."]

Ratio Decidendi

Section 11(1) of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 did not apply because the offender, although a child at the time of the crime, was not a child when the criminal proceedings were on foot or at least when they commenced; accordingly authorisation under s 11(4B) was unnecessary.

Court Disposition

Application declined; the Court held that s 11 did not apply and, alternatively, would have authorised publication or broadcasting of the offender's name under s 11(4B).

Orders

  • ['No non-publication order was made.' "The Court stated that, if power under s 11(4B) were needed, it would authorise publication or broadcasting of the offender's name."]