EE v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 870

EE v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 870

The court was satisfied that the plaintiff's psychiatric condition justifies the need for privacy and anonymity through the use of a pseudonym and a suppression order, even though she previously appeared publicly at a Royal Commission.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
['suppression Order' 'pseudonym' 'privacy in Proceedings' 'child Sexual Abuse']
['procedure'] ['suppression Order' 'pseudonym' 'privacy in Proceedings' 'child Sexual Abuse']

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

Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to proceed under a pseudonym' "Whether a suppression/non-publication order should be made regarding the plaintiff's identity"]

Ratio Decidendi

The court was satisfied that the plaintiff's psychiatric condition justifies the need for privacy and anonymity through the use of a pseudonym and a suppression order, even though she previously appeared publicly at a Royal Commission.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • ["The Plaintiff be granted leave to commence and continue these proceedings by a pseudonym 'EE'." 'Pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW), the name and address of the Plaintiff and any member of her family not be published without the leave of the Court in reliance on s...