Capilano Honey Ltd v Dowling [2020] NSWSC 660

Because the defendant refused to undertake not to record proceedings without permission, contrary to the judicial order and statutory prohibition, it was necessary to exclude him from participating in the remote hearing unless and until he undertook not to record, thus safeguarding court security and integrity.

Parties: First Plaintiff: Capilano Honey Ltd; Second Plaintiff: Ben McKee; Defendant: Shane Dowling
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 25 May 2020
Procedural Posture: Civil / Interlocutory/procedural Ruling
Outcome: Defendant to be digitally excluded from proceedings until undertaking provided not to record or retain recordings.
Legal Topics: Recording of Proceedings, Court Security, Remote Hearings

Procedure Recording of Proceedings Court Security Remote Hearings

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

Capilano Honey Ltd

First Plaintiff

Ben McKee

Second Plaintiff

Shane Dowling

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory/procedural Ruling

Legal Issues

1 Whether the defendant may record court proceedings without permission
2 Appropriate response to unauthorised recording of remote court proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Defendant to be digitally excluded from proceedings until undertaking provided not to record or retain recordings.

Orders

Defendant excluded from proceedings until undertaking not to record in any form in future and to destroy any existing recordings is given.
Proceedings may continue ex parte until such undertaking is given.