Clark v Digital Wallet Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 877

Clark v Digital Wallet Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 877

The identified material and confidential exhibits concerned the first respondent's current commercial transaction, including the identity of Company A and the nature and details of the opportunity and transaction; the information was not in the public domain, was known only to a limited group under non-disclosure protocols, and disclosure posed a real risk of jeopardising the transaction, affecting shareholder funding and the first respondent's financial viability. Because publication would risk making the Court's processes a vehicle for prejudicing commercial interests and trade rivalry, suppression, non-publication and confidentiality orders limited to 31 December 2020 or earlier...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Suppression and Non Publication Orders and Confidentiality Orders / Amended Interlocutory Application After the Substantive Proceedings Had Been Discontinued
Outcome
Application granted.
Legal Topics
['suppression and Non Publication Orders' 'confidentiality Orders' 'open Justice' 'commercial Confidentiality' 'third Party Access to Court Documents']
['practice and Procedure' 'employment & Industrial Relations'] ['suppression and Non Publication Orders' 'confidentiality Orders' 'open Justice' 'commercial Confidentiality' 'third Party Access to Court Documents']

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

Application for Suppression and Non Publication Orders and Confidentiality Orders / Amended Interlocutory Application After the Substantive Proceedings Had Been Discontinued

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether identified material in the statement of claim and originating application should be suppressed, not published or disclosed, and kept confidential because it related to the first respondent's commercial affairs." 'Whether Confidential Exhibits KM-1, KM-2 and KM-3 to the Mataraaratchi affidavit should be subject to non-publication, suppression and confidentiality orders.' 'Whether the orders were necessary to prevent prejudice to the proper administration of justice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The identified material and confidential exhibits concerned the first respondent's current commercial transaction, including the identity of Company A and the nature and details of the opportunity and transaction; the information was not in the public domain, was known only to a limited group under non-disclosure protocols, and disclosure posed a real risk of jeopardising the transaction, affecting shareholder funding and the first respondent's financial viability. Because publication would risk making the Court's processes a vehicle for prejudicing commercial interests and trade rivalry, suppression, non-publication and confidentiality orders limited to 31 December 2020 or earlier...

Court Disposition

Application granted.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 37AF of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), until 31 December 2020 or such earlier time as notified in accordance with order 5, identified parts of the statement of claim filed on 26 May 2020 and annexure to the originating application filed on 26 May 2020 were ordered confidential within...