BB v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 237

BB v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 237

The Plaintiff, who alleged she suffered physical and sexual abuse as a minor and had psychiatric problems associated with that abuse, established that privacy and family-protection considerations justified the limited incursion on open justice. Applying reasons similar to Witness v Marsden, the Court held that leave to proceed by pseudonym and a suppression or non-publication order concerning the Plaintiff's identity should be made.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion for Leave to Commence and Continue Proceedings Using a Pseudonym and for a Suppression or Non Publication Order / Procedural Ruling
Outcome
Application granted; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to Proceed by Pseudonym' 'suppression of Plaintiff Identity' 'open Justice' 'claims Arising From Alleged Physical and Sexual Abuse of a Minor']
['civil Procedure' 'suppression and Non Publication Orders' 'common Law'] ['leave to Proceed by Pseudonym' 'suppression of Plaintiff Identity' 'open Justice' 'claims Arising From Alleged Physical and Sexual Abuse of a Minor']

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

Notice of Motion for Leave to Commence and Continue Proceedings Using a Pseudonym and for a Suppression or Non Publication Order / Procedural Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Plaintiff should be granted leave to commence and continue the proceedings using the pseudonym BB.' "Whether a suppression or non-publication order should be made in relation to the Plaintiff's identity under s 7 of the Courts (Suppression and Non-Publication Orders) Act 2010 (NSW)." 'Whether the order was necessary in the public interest under s 8(1)(e) and whether that public interest significantly outweighed the public interest in open justice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff, who alleged she suffered physical and sexual abuse as a minor and had psychiatric problems associated with that abuse, established that privacy and family-protection considerations justified the limited incursion on open justice. Applying reasons similar to Witness v Marsden, the Court held that leave to proceed by pseudonym and a suppression or non-publication order concerning the Plaintiff's identity should be made.

Court Disposition

Application granted; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['The Plaintiff be granted leave to commence and continue these proceedings by a pseudonym BB.' '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...