Moseley v AB (No 2)

The matter involved an application by an individual against an entity for suppression and non-publication orders regarding the naming of schools, with the case being heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. The applicant sought orders under section 7 of the relevant legislation, specifically addressing the final issue of whether the names of certain schools should be suppressed or published. The entity and an Intervenor opposed the application, with the latter arguing that the application should be dismissed on the basis that it was an abuse of process.

The court had to determine whether the applicant was entitled to the sought orders and whether the Intervenor, who had intervened in the proceedings, was subject to any costs orders. The legal issues revolved around the interpretation and application of section 7 of the legislation, the principles governing costs in cases of intervention, and the conduct of the parties throughout the proceedings.

The court found in favour of the applicant, granting the sought orders regarding the naming of the schools. In reaching this decision, the court considered the provisions of section 7 and the factors that should be taken into account when deciding whether to make such orders. The court held that the applicant was entitled to the orders, as the publication of the names of the schools would cause substantial harm to the applicant. Furthermore, the court held that the Intervenor was subject to costs orders, taking into account the principles governing costs in cases of intervention and the conduct of the parties during the proceedings.

The final orders included suppression and non-publication orders regarding the naming of the schools, as sought by the applicant. Additionally, the court ordered the Intervenor to pay the costs of the applicant and the entity, taking into account the factors outlined above.