Shariful v Freitas [2023] NSWCATAP 241

Shariful v Freitas [2023] NSWCATAP 241

The appellant did not provide persuasive or substantiated reasons to show it was desirable to depart from the principle of open justice by making a non-disclosure order under s 64. The potential for professional or reputational impact was unexplained and unconvincing, and the information was already in the public domain.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Determination of Application for Non Disclosure Order After Appeal Decision
Outcome
Application for non-disclosure order dismissed.
Legal Topics
['non Disclosure Orders' 'open Justice' 'residential Tenancies']
['practice and Procedure'] ['non Disclosure Orders' 'open Justice' 'residential Tenancies']

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

Appeal / Determination of Application for Non Disclosure Order After Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether it is desirable to make a non-disclosure order under s 64 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) to remove or redact the appellant's name from case documentation"]

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not provide persuasive or substantiated reasons to show it was desirable to depart from the principle of open justice by making a non-disclosure order under s 64. The potential for professional or reputational impact was unexplained and unconvincing, and the information was already in the public domain.

Court Disposition

Application for non-disclosure order dismissed.

Orders

  • ['A hearing of the application for an order under s 64 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) is dispensed with.' 'The application is dismissed.']