Friedrich v Herald & Weekly Times Limited

This matter concerned an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia. The applicant, Herald & Weekly Times Limited, sought to challenge a decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The dispute arose from an examination conducted under section 541 of the *Companies Code*, during which the applicant faced charges and was the subject of intense public scrutiny. A key element of the case was a publication restriction order made by a Master of the Supreme Court.

The legal issues before the High Court included whether the Full Court had erred in its interpretation of section 541 of the *Companies Code*. Specifically, the applicant argued that the Full Court had placed too much emphasis on the historical necessity for examinations under this section to be conducted in public, to the detriment of an individual's right to a fair trial. The applicant contended that the Full Court failed to adequately consider the court's power to restrict publication of proceedings, even when those proceedings were conducted in public.

The applicant argued that the power to restrict publication derived from either section 541(5) of the *Companies Code* or the inherent power of the Supreme Court, as reflected in section 18 of the *Supreme Court Act* (Vic). This latter provision, it was submitted, allowed the court to order that no person publish any part of the proceedings of an open court hearing. The applicant's central submission was that while the Full Court correctly acknowledged the norm of public examination, it erred by failing to properly appreciate the balance between this norm and the right to a fair trial, particularly in the context of the court's power to impose publication restrictions.