Lavin v Toppi (No 2) [2016] FCA 818

Lavin v Toppi (No 2) [2016] FCA 818

The application for a non-publication order was refused because publication of the information would not prejudice the proper administration of justice and interim confidentiality measures were insufficient for a final order. Redacting the judgment would, in fact, prejudice the administration of justice by withholding the judge's full reasons from the public.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure / Application for Non Publication Order
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
['non Publication Orders' 'suppression Orders' 'proper Administration of Justice']
['practice and Procedure'] ['non Publication Orders' 'suppression Orders' 'proper Administration of Justice']

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

Practice and Procedure / Application for Non Publication Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a non-publication order is necessary to prevent prejudice to the proper administration of justice']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for a non-publication order was refused because publication of the information would not prejudice the proper administration of justice and interim confidentiality measures were insufficient for a final order. Redacting the judgment would, in fact, prejudice the administration of justice by withholding the judge's full reasons from the public.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • ['The application for a non-publication order is refused.']