Burton v Director of Public Prosecutions [2022] NSWCA 242

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Burton v Director of Public Prosecutions [2022] NSWCA 242 Hearing dates: 26 July 2022 Date of orders: 30 November 2022 Decision date: 30 November 2022 Before: Bell CJ at [1] Leeming JA at [2] Kirk JA at [3] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal is granted. (2) The appellants are to file a notice of appeal in terms of the draft notice of appeal within 14 days. (3) The appeal is dismissed. (4) The appellants are to pay the costs of the respondents. Catchwords: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — Commonwealth Constitution — Implied freedom of political communication — Section 105 of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW) — Section 105 prohibits the publication or broadcasting of the name of a child only where connected to care proceedings or procedures under the State's child welfare system — Relevant child or young person may consent to publication or broadcasting from 16 years of age onwards — Section 105 imposes a not insignificant but limited burden on the implied freedom — Purpose of s 105 of protecting privacy is legitimate — Burden on the freedom is justified — Section 105 not invalid for breach of the implied freedom COVID-19 — no discrimination in unvaccinated appellants having to appear by audio-visual link in circumstances where they had not sought exemption from policy, and manner of appearance made no difference in any event Legislation Cited: Adoption Act 2000 (NSW), ss 119 and 180 Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW), ss 3, 8-10, 24, 25, 27, 34, 43, 44, 45, 60, 73-79A, 86, 90A, 104A-C, 105, 120-122, 135, Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), ss 15A-15G Commonwealth Constitution Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), s 45 Cases Cited: Attorney-General (NSW) v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd (1990) 20 NSWLR 368 Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1992) 177 CLR 106; [1992] HCA 45 Brown v Tasmania (2017) 261 CLR 328; [2017] HCA 43 Burton v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (2021) 361 FLR 432; [2021] NSWSC 1230 Burton v Secretary, Dept of Communities and Justice [2019] NSWCA 21 Burton v Secretary, Dept of Communities and Justice [2020] NSWCA 68 Comcare v Banerji (2019) 267 CLR 373; [2019] HCA 23 Farm Transparency International Ltd v New South Wales (2022) 96 ALJR 655; [2022] HCA 23 Hogan v Hinch (2011) 243 CLR 506; [2011] HCA 4 Kirk v Industrial Court (NSW) (2010) 239 CLR 531; [2010] HCA 1 Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520; [1997] HCA 25 McCloy v New South Wales (2015) 257 CLR 178; [2015] HCA 34 Palmer v Western Australia (2021) 95 ALJR 229; [2021] HCA 5 Re J [2014] 1 FLR 523; [2013] EWHC 2694 (Fam) Russell v Russell (1976) 134 CLR 495; [1976] HCA 23 Scott v Scott [1913] AC 417 Secretary, Dept of Family and Community Services v Smith [2017] NSWSC 6 Secretary, Dept of Family and Community Services v Smith (2017) 95 NSWLR 597; [2017] NSWCA 206 Taylor v The Owners - Strata Plan No 11564 (2014) 253 CLR 531; [2014] HCA 9 Unions NSW v New South Wales (2013) 252 CLR 530; [2013] HCA 58 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Paul Robert Burton (First applicant) Andrew Katelaris (Second applicant) Director Public Prosecutions (First respondent) Local Court of New South Wales (Second respondent) Attorney-General of New South Wales (Third respondent) Representation: Counsel: