Moseley v AB [2017] NSWSC 916

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Moseley v AB [2017] NSWSC 916 Hearing dates: 27 February; 16 May 2017 Date of orders: 11 July 2017 Decision date: 11 July 2017 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Walton J Decision: In the course of the proceedings the Court stated, with the concurrence of the parties, that the question of the form of orders would be held over until the determination of the merits of the motion, particularly having regard to issues concerning the duration of the orders.

In the result, AB shall file and serve short minutes of order identifying any variation to the orders sought in the motion in accordance with terms of this judgment, together with written submissions in support thereof within 7 days of publication of this judgment. The Intervenor shall file written submissions in reply no later than 7 days after the service of the short minutes of order and written submissions by AB. The matter may be listed for oral submissions upon application by either party in their written submissions filed in accordance with these directions or if that course is considered appropriate by the Court.

The interim suppression order shall continue until final orders are made by the Court. Catchwords: ORDERS – suppression and non-publication orders – final orders sought under s 7 – prohibiting the publication of any material which is capable of identifying the second defendant – principles of open justice – safety ground, s 8(1)(c) – construction of s 8(1)(c) – meaning of necessary – probability of harm construction – imminence of harm construction – probability of harm if orders not made – orders necessary to protect safety of a person – nature and degree of the likelihood of harm – nature of the risk– imminence of harm – suppression or non-publication order found necessary to protect safety – form of orders subject to submissions – directions Legislation Cited: Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Federal Court Act 1976 (Cth) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) Cases Cited: Ashton v Pratt [2011] NSWSC 1092 Boughey v The Queen (1986) 161 CLR 1; [1986] HCA 18 Commission of the Australian Federal Police in Zhao (2015) 255 CLR 46; [2015] HCA 5 D1 v P1 [2012] NSWCA 314 Fairfax Digital v Ibrahim (2012) 83 NSWLR 52; [2012] NSWCCA 125 Hearne v Street (2008) 235 CLR 125; [2008] HCA 36 Hogan v Australian Crime Commission (2010) 240 CLR 651; [2010] HCA 21 John Fairfax & Sons Pty Ltd v Police Tribunal (NSW) (1986) 5 NSWLR 465 Liu v The Age Company [2010] NSWSC 1176 Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited [2000] NSWSC 65 New South Crime Commission v Vu [2009] NSWCA 349 Rinehart v Welker [2011] NSWCA 403 State of NSW v Kay [2017] NSWSC 274 Wily v Terra Cresta Business Solutions Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 949 Woodcroft-Brown v Timbercorp Securities Ltd [2013] 96 ACSR 307; [2013] VSCA 284 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Benjamin Peter Moseley (Plaintiff) The Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Parramatta (First Defendant) AB (Second Defendant / Applicant on Motion) Australia Broadcasting Corporation (Intervenor) Representation: Counsel: C Bolger (Plaintiff) J Vella (First Defendant) D R Sibtain and N Compton (Second Defendant) M J Lewis (Intervenor)