Newcrest Mining Ltd v Santos WA Northwest Pty Ltd [No 2]

Newcrest Mining Ltd commenced proceedings against Santos WA Northwest Pty Ltd for alleged breaches of a gas supply agreement. The court was asked to decide whether orders restricting access to certain information and documents, including a confidential term of the contract, should be vacated. The dispute centred on the operation of the principles of open justice and the confidentiality of commercial terms. The court was required to consider whether the orders restricting access to and publication of certain information were justified and whether they should be vacated.

The court examined the principles of open justice, which generally require court proceedings to be conducted in public. However, the court recognised that there are circumstances where confidentiality may override these principles. In this case, the court found that the term of the gas supply agreement was confidential and that access to documents disclosing this term should be restricted. The court also found that references to the confidential term or its general effect should be redacted from the transcript. The court considered the balance between the need for confidentiality and the public interest in open justice.

The court held that the orders restricting access to and publication of certain information were justified and should not be vacated. The court found that the confidential term of the gas supply agreement was a commercial secret and that disclosure could cause significant harm to the parties. The court also found that the redaction of references to the confidential term from the transcript was necessary to protect the parties' interests. The court concluded that the orders were necessary to balance the principles of open justice with the need for confidentiality.

The court made orders that the restrictions on access to and publication of certain information, including the confidential term of the gas supply agreement, should remain in place. The court also made orders that references to the confidential term or its general effect should be redacted from the transcript. The court found that the orders were justified and necessary to protect the parties' interests.