State of New South Wales (Justice Health) and anor v Dezfouli [2008] NSWADTAP 69

State of New South Wales (Justice Health) and anor v Dezfouli [2008] NSWADTAP 69

Having regard to the broadened evidence of potential harm to the employee, colleagues, and Justice Health's operations, and applying section 75(2) of the ADT Act within the context of the principle of open justice but recognising special, out-of-the-ordinary circumstances, it is correct and preferable to grant a suppression order so that the second appellant is identified only by pseudonym in published decisions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Panel Determination
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
['suppression Orders' 'open Justice' 'anonymity in Tribunal Proceedings']
['administrative Law'] ['suppression Orders' 'open Justice' 'anonymity in Tribunal Proceedings']

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 / Appeal Panel Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a suppression order should be made under section 75(2) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 (NSW) to anonymise the name of a Justice Health employee in published tribunal decisions.']

Ratio Decidendi

Having regard to the broadened evidence of potential harm to the employee, colleagues, and Justice Health's operations, and applying section 75(2) of the ADT Act within the context of the principle of open justice but recognising special, out-of-the-ordinary circumstances, it is correct and preferable to grant a suppression order so that the second appellant is identified only by pseudonym in published decisions.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is granted.' 'Leave is granted for the appeal to extend to the merits and for the Appellants to adduce further evidence.' 'The appeal is allowed.' "Orders 1 and 2 of the Appeal Panel made on 8 August 2008 are discharged and substituted: The Second Appellant is to be identified by the pseudonym...