D'Alo v Nolan - [2006] VSC 362

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

No. 7387 of 2005

GIUSEPPE D'ALO	Plaintiff
v
JOHN NOLAN	First Defendant
THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA	Second Defendant

---

JUDGE:	OSBORN J
WHERE HELD:	MELBOURNE
DATE OF HEARING:	14 SEPTEMBER 2006
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	4 OCTOBER 2006
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	D’ALO v NOLAN
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2006] VSC 362	1^st Revision: 4 October 2006

---

Unauthorised disclosure of confidential information by police officer – Publication of facts by author of book – Meaning of “publishes” – Statutory interpretation – Section 127A Police Regulation Act 1958.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiff	Mr N. Hutton	Mike Wardell & Associates
For the First Defendant	Mr J. McArdle QC	Office of Public Prosecutions

HIS HONOUR:

The plaintiff, a police officer, seeks an order in the nature of certiorari setting aside the decision of his Honour Judge Ross in the County Court made on appeal from a Magistrates' Court, convicting the plaintiff of a "rolled up" charge pursuant to s.127A of the Police Regulation Act 1958 ("the Act") and imposing a fine of $1,500.

Section 127A of the Act provides:

"127A Unauthorized disclosure of information and documents
(1)Any member of the police force who publishes or communicates, except to some person to whom he is authorized to publish or communicate it, any fact or document which comes to his knowledge or into his possession by virtue of his office and which it is his duty not to disclose shall be guilty of an offence against this Act and liable to a fine of not more than 20 penalty units."

The charge arose out of the publication of a book entitled "One Down, One Missing" of which the plaintiff was the author. The book disclosed information was disclosed relating to some seven police informers which it is admitted the plaintiff was bound to keep confidential.

The book provides extensive details of two police operations. Operation Hamada was set up to investigate a series of 11 armed robberies generally involving take-away food stores and restaurants. The first of the "Hamada" armed robberies occurred in March 1998 and the last occurred in July 1998. On 15 August 1998 two police officers, Sergeant Gary Silk and Senior Constable Rodney Miller, were required to conduct surveillance as part of Operation Hamada. Shortly after midnight on 16 August 1998 Silk and Miller intercepted a suspect vehicle in Cochranes Road, Moorabbin and in the course of that interception were shot and killed.

The Lorimer Task Force was established to investigate the murders of Silk and Miller. The investigation resulted in the arrest, charging and subsequent conviction of Bandali Debs and Jason Roberts for the murders.

The book was published in a form which emphasised the inside knowledge of the plaintiff as a police officer. The rear cover states in part:

"One Down, One Missing is a vivid in-house account of the Lorimer Task Force, the elite team assembled to investigate the men's…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading D'Alo v Nolan

Details

AGLC: D'Alo v Nolan [2006] VSC 362
Case: [2006] VSC 362
Decision Date: 4 October 2006

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of D'Alo v Nolan involves a dispute between the plaintiff, Mr D'Alo, and the defendant, Mr Nolan. Mr D'Alo, a former police officer, sought an injunction and damages for the unauthorised disclosure of confidential information by Mr Nolan, who is a police officer. The disclosure occurred through the publication of facts in a book authored by Mr Nolan. The legal dispute came before the Supreme Court of Victoria. The central legal issues before the court were the interpretation of the term "publishes" as used in Section 127A of the Police Regulation Act 1958, and whether the disclosure of confidential information by Mr Nolan constituted an offence under the statute.

The court examined the meaning of "publishes" within the context of the statutory provision. It was necessary to determine whether the term included the act of publishing facts in a book. The court considered the ordinary meaning of the word "publishes," as well as the legislative intent behind Section 127A. The court concluded that the term "publishes" did indeed encompass the publication of facts in a book, as it involved making the information available to the public. Furthermore, the court found that the disclosure of confidential information by Mr Nolan was an unauthorised publication, and therefore constituted an offence under the statute.

Based on its findings, the court granted Mr D'Alo an injunction against Mr Nolan, prohibiting him from further disclosing the confidential information. Additionally, the court awarded damages to Mr D'Alo for the unauthorised publication. The court's interpretation of the term "publishes" and its application to the facts of the case led to a determination that Mr Nolan's actions were unlawful. Consequently, the court issued an injunction and awarded damages to the plaintiff, Mr D'Alo, in accordance with the statutory provisions of the Police Regulation Act 1958.

Orders