Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 22) [2021] FCA 1323

Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 22) [2021] FCA 1323

The benefit of resuming the trial in Sydney on 8 November 2021 for a short period was outweighed by the resource demands, regional and interstate travel complications and quarantine consequences. Relocation to Adelaide was not justified because the Commonwealth required an estimated 8 to 12 weeks to replicate security, closed court and other arrangements, the trial could not realistically resume there before mid to late January 2022, and there was considerable uncertainty about future border restrictions. Because restrictions and border closures remained highly uncertain, no resumed hearing date, including 28 February 2022, should be fixed; the existing date should be vacated and the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Interlocutory Applications During Trial Concerning Relocation, Resumed Hearing Date and Adjournment
Outcome
The 1 November 2021 resumed trial date was vacated; the applicant's proposed relocation and short Sydney resumption were not ordered; the respondents' proposed fixed resumption date of 28 February 2022 was not fixed; the trial was adjourned to a date to be fixed.
Legal Topics
['relocation of Trial' 'adjournment of Trial' 'covid 19 Border Closures and Restrictions' 'audio Visual Link Evidence' 'closed Court and Sensitive Witnesses']
['practice and Procedure' 'defamation' 'national Security Information'] ['relocation of Trial' 'adjournment of Trial' 'covid 19 Border Closures and Restrictions' 'audio Visual Link Evidence' 'closed Court and Sensitive Witnesses']

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

Defamation Proceedings / Interlocutory Applications During Trial Concerning Relocation, Resumed Hearing Date and Adjournment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial should resume in Sydney on 8 November 2021 for a short period to hear evidence from identified witnesses.' 'Whether the remainder of the trial should be relocated to Adelaide, South Australia.' 'Whether the trial should be adjourned to 28 February 2022 or to a date to be fixed.']

Ratio Decidendi

The benefit of resuming the trial in Sydney on 8 November 2021 for a short period was outweighed by the resource demands, regional and interstate travel complications and quarantine consequences. Relocation to Adelaide was not justified because the Commonwealth required an estimated 8 to 12 weeks to replicate security, closed court and other arrangements, the trial could not realistically resume there before mid to late January 2022, and there was considerable uncertainty about future border restrictions. Because restrictions and border closures remained highly uncertain, no resumed hearing date, including 28 February 2022, should be fixed; the existing date should be vacated and the...

Court Disposition

The 1 November 2021 resumed trial date was vacated; the applicant's proposed relocation and short Sydney resumption were not ordered; the respondents' proposed fixed resumption date of 28 February 2022 was not fixed; the trial was adjourned to a date to be fixed.

Orders

  • ['The date of 1 November 2021 fixed for the resumption of the trial be vacated.' 'The trial resume on a date to be fixed.' 'The matter be listed for a case management hearing at 2:15pm (AEDT) on Friday, 3 December 2021.']