Plaintiff AA by Tutor BB v Australian Capital Territory (No 2)

[2022] ACTSC 314

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

Plaintiff AA by Tutor BB v Australian Capital Territory (No 2)

Citation:

[2022] ACTSC 314

Hearing Date:

15 November 2022

DecisionDate:

15 November 2022

Before:

Elkaim J

Decision:

(a)    I make Orders 1, 2, 3 and 4 in the document titled Application in Proceeding dated 15 November 2022;

(b)    I make no order as to costs.

Catchwords:

CIVIL LAW – APPLICATION – Application to inspect registry files – where the plaintiff seeks to be released from its implied undertaking to not use documents in proceedings in order to use documents for related proceedings in New South Wales – application allowed – no order as to costs

Cases Cited:

Plaintiff AA by Tutor BB v Australian Capital Territory [2021] ACTSC 316

Parties:

Plaintiff AA by Tutor BB (Plaintiff)

Australian Capital Territory (Defendant)

Representation:

Counsel

A Schofield (Plaintiff)

L Holley (Defendant)

Solicitors

Benjamin Lawyers (Plaintiff)

ACT Government Solicitor (Defendant)

File Number:

SC 114 of 2017

ELKAIM J

1․On 10 December 2021, I approved a settlement involving an infant and at the same time made certain orders protecting confidentiality of the settlement: Plaintiff AA by Tutor BB v Australian Capital Territory [2021] ACTSC 316.

2․The parents of the infant have their own proceedings both in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) and in New South Wales (NSW). The proceedings in NSW are against the former solicitors of the infant. I assume they are the solicitors referred to in paragraph 8(a) of my previous reasons

3․In order to efficiently progress the actions against both the ACT and the former solicitors, the infant has filed an application in proceeding seeking orders that effectively lift the confidentiality restrictions previously made and allow documents from the infant’s proceedings to be made available in respect of the parents’ proceedings.

4․The ACT does not oppose the application but says that it is a matter for the Court. I have been informed that the current solicitors for the defendant in NSW also do not oppose the application. The application is one that would significantly facilitate the resolution of both sets of proceedings, in particular at the mediation level.

5․Accordingly, I make the following orders:

(a)I make Orders 1, 2, 3 and 4 in the document titled Application in Proceeding dated 15 November 2022;

(b)I make no order as to costs.

I certify that the preceding five [5] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of his Honour Justice Elkaim.

Associate:

Date: