AA v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 236

AA v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 236

Given the sensitive nature of the proceedings and the potential impact on the plaintiff and her family, and consistent with the principles in Witness v Marsden [2000] NSWCA 52, the making of the pseudonym and suppression orders is necessary and appropriate.

Parties
Plaintiff: AA; First Defendant: Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: Sharman Okan
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Procedural Orders / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application granted for pseudonym and suppression orders.
Legal Topics
Pseudonym Orders, Suppression and Non Publication Orders, Privacy of Parties, Sexual Abuse Claims

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AA

Plaintiff

Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Sharman Okan

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Procedural Orders / Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to proceed using a pseudonym
  2. 2 Whether a suppression or non-publication order should be made regarding the plaintiff's identity

Ratio Decidendi

Given the sensitive nature of the proceedings and the potential impact on the plaintiff and her family, and consistent with the principles in Witness v Marsden [2000] NSWCA 52, the making of the pseudonym and suppression orders is necessary and appropriate.

Court Disposition

Application granted for pseudonym and suppression orders.

Orders

  • The Plaintiff be granted leave to commence and continue these proceedings by a pseudonym AA.
  • Pursuant to s 7 of the Courts (Suppression and Non-Publication Orders) Act, 2010 (NSW), the name and address of the Plaintiff, and any member of their families, are not to be published without the leave of the Court by reason of s 8(1)(e) of that Act.