O’Dell (a pseudonym) v R [2023] NSWCCA 46

O’Dell (a pseudonym) v R [2023] NSWCCA 46

The evidence established that an order under the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) was necessary to protect the safety of any person within s 8(1)(c), and justified a 30-year order applying throughout the Commonwealth. However, it was not necessary to suppress the whole judgment or the fact and outcome of the application because a redacted judgment could be published without disclosing information from which the offender's identity might be inferred, thereby preserving open justice so far as possible.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for a Non Publication Order Concerning a Judgment Dismissing a Criminal Sentence Appeal / Consequential Orders; on the Papers
Outcome
Non-publication order made in limited form; notice of motion otherwise dismissed; exhibits returned.
Legal Topics
['publication of Reasons for Judgment' 'safety of a Person' 'redaction of Judgment' 'assistance to Authorities' 'sentence Appeal']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'open Justice' 'suppression and Non Publication Orders'] ['publication of Reasons for Judgment' 'safety of a Person' 'redaction of Judgment' 'assistance to Authorities' 'sentence Appeal']

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 for a Non Publication Order Concerning a Judgment Dismissing a Criminal Sentence Appeal / Consequential Orders; on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether it was necessary under the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) to prohibit publication or disclosure of the Court's judgment and related materials for 30 years." 'Whether a more limited order permitting publication of a redacted form of the judgment would protect the safety of any person while safeguarding open justice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence established that an order under the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) was necessary to protect the safety of any person within s 8(1)(c), and justified a 30-year order applying throughout the Commonwealth. However, it was not necessary to suppress the whole judgment or the fact and outcome of the application because a redacted judgment could be published without disclosing information from which the offender's identity might be inferred, thereby preserving open justice so far as possible.

Court Disposition

Non-publication order made in limited form; notice of motion otherwise dismissed; exhibits returned.

Orders

  • ['Order, pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW), on the ground stated in s 8(1)(c), that there be no publication or disclosure of the judgment [2022] NSWCCA 292 anywhere in the Commonwealth for a period of thirty years from today, except to the extent as is found in...