Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited [2019] FCA 36

Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited [2019] FCA 36

Having considered the combined effect of the evidence, including Person 17's evidence, Facebook posts, and the evidence concerning the incident involving Ms Yumi Stynes and its aftermath, and while taking into account the public interest in open justice, the Court was satisfied that at this stage the suppression order was necessary to protect the safety of Person 17 under s 37AG(1)(c). The Court also found a sufficient risk of threats to, or intimidation of, Person 17 as a proposed witness if her identity were revealed to justify the order under s 37AG(1)(a).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings; Application for Suppression Order Under S 37 AF of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth) / Interlocutory Application Concerning Suppression of the Identity of a Proposed Witness
Outcome
Suppression order application upheld in principle; parties to be heard as to the appropriate orders.
Legal Topics
['suppression Orders' 'open Justice' 'witness Safety' 'proper Administration of Justice' 'justification' 'contextual Truth']
['practice and Procedure' 'defamation'] ['suppression Orders' 'open Justice' 'witness Safety' 'proper Administration of Justice' 'justification' 'contextual Truth']

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; Application for Suppression Order Under S 37 AF of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth) / Interlocutory Application Concerning Suppression of the Identity of a Proposed Witness

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a suppression order should be made under s 37AF of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) in relation to the identity of Person 17, a proposed witness.' 'Whether the order was necessary to protect the safety of any person under s 37AG(1)(c) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).' 'Whether proof that harm would probably occur absent the order was a precondition to an order under s 37AG(1)(c).' 'Whether the order was necessary to prevent prejudice to the proper administration of justice under s 37AG(1)(a).']

Ratio Decidendi

Having considered the combined effect of the evidence, including Person 17's evidence, Facebook posts, and the evidence concerning the incident involving Ms Yumi Stynes and its aftermath, and while taking into account the public interest in open justice, the Court was satisfied that at this stage the suppression order was necessary to protect the safety of Person 17 under s 37AG(1)(c). The Court also found a sufficient risk of threats to, or intimidation of, Person 17 as a proposed witness if her identity were revealed to justify the order under s 37AG(1)(a).

Court Disposition

Suppression order application upheld in principle; parties to be heard as to the appropriate orders.

Orders

  • ['The respondents bring in minutes of order reflecting the conclusions expressed in these reasons.']