Tisdall v Health Insurance Commission (No 2) [2002] FCA 149

Tisdall v Health Insurance Commission (No 2) [2002] FCA 149

The public interest in open justice outweighs considerations of potential prejudice to the applicant; no evidence of prejudice was produced and the application was made at a late stage, so the requested suppression and stay orders were refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Post Judgment Suppression and Stay Application
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
['suppression Orders' 'stay of Proceedings' 'open Justice' 'costs']
['civil Procedure'] ['suppression Orders' 'stay of Proceedings' 'open Justice' 'costs']

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

Interlocutory Application / Post Judgment Suppression and Stay Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether there should be a suppression order over the applicant's name or the judgment" 'Whether further proceedings by the Determining Officer should be stayed pending appeal']

Ratio Decidendi

The public interest in open justice outweighs considerations of potential prejudice to the applicant; no evidence of prejudice was produced and the application was made at a late stage, so the requested suppression and stay orders were refused.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the respondents' costs."]