R v Simmons (No 5) (Non-Publication Orders) [2015] NSWSC 333

R v Simmons (No 5) (Non-Publication Orders) [2015] NSWSC 333

Suppression and non-publication orders, narrowly tailored and allowing for exceptions through restricted legal access (JIRS), are justified and necessary to protect the safety of undercover officers, the confidentiality of the investigative technique, and the proper administration of justice pursuant to s 8(1)(a),...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Accused: Tony James Simmons; Applicant: NSW Commissioner of Police; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application for Suppression and Non Publication Orders During Ongoing Criminal Trial
Outcome
Suppression and non-publication orders granted (as specified) with exceptions for restricted legal access and appropriately redacted publication.
Legal Topics
Suppression Orders, Non Publication Orders, Open Justice, Undercover Police, Assumed Identities, Confidential Evidence
Criminal Law Procedure Suppression Orders Non Publication Orders Open Justice Undercover Police Assumed Identities Confidential Evidence

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tony James Simmons

Accused

NSW Commissioner of Police

Applicant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Application for Suppression and Non Publication Orders During Ongoing Criminal Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-publication and suppression orders should be made to protect the identity of undercover police and the methodology of the police investigation
  2. 2 Whether the details of 'Mr Big' police investigative technique should be suppressed from publication generally, especially on legal websites
  3. 3 Whether the suppression/non-publication orders are necessary under s 8 of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW)

Ratio Decidendi

Suppression and non-publication orders, narrowly tailored and allowing for exceptions through restricted legal access (JIRS), are justified and necessary to protect the safety of undercover officers, the confidentiality of the investigative technique, and the proper administration of justice pursuant to s 8(1)(a), (c), and (e) of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW). Orders are not made lightly, given open justice, but justified by the specifics and potential risk in this case.

Court Disposition

Suppression and non-publication orders granted (as specified) with exceptions for restricted legal access and appropriately redacted publication.

Orders

  • All previous non-publication and suppression orders revoked and replaced with new orders per reasons; undercover police witnesses to use assumed names and have identities protected; closure of the court for their evidence; non-publication of police operation details and submissions relating to the Commissioner's...