QRS v Legal Profession Board of Tasmania

QRS sought a permanent non-publication order in relation to certain documents filed in proceedings between QRS and the Legal Profession Board of Tasmania. The application was made by interlocutory motion after the principal proceeding had concluded. The matter came before the Supreme Court of Tasmania, constituted by Blow CJ, Marshall and Porter AJJ.

The primary legal issue before the Full Court was whether it retained jurisdiction to hear and determine the interlocutory application for a permanent non-publication order, notwithstanding the conclusion of the principal proceeding. A secondary issue, if jurisdiction was found to exist, concerned the principles to be applied in determining whether to grant such an order, particularly in light of the public interest in open justice.

The Court considered the status of an interlocutory application after the conclusion of the principal proceeding. It held that, in the absence of specific statutory provisions to the contrary, an interlocutory application does not automatically lapse upon the conclusion of the substantive proceedings. The Court affirmed that the jurisdiction to make orders concerning the conduct of litigation, including orders for non-publication, can survive the final determination of the main dispute, particularly where such orders are necessary to give effect to the court's inherent powers or statutory discretions. The Court referred to the principles governing non-publication orders, emphasising the strong presumption in favour of open justice and the need for compelling reasons to depart from this principle.

The Court ultimately dismissed the application for a permanent non-publication order.