R v BB (No 3)

[2019] NSWSC 1391

Supreme Court

New South Wales

• Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v BB (No 3) [2019] NSWSC 1391
Hearing dates:	26 – 30 August; 3 – 5 September 2019
Date of orders:	5 September 2019
Decision date:	05 September 2019
Jurisdiction:	Common Law - Criminal
Before:	Rothman J
Decision:	(1)   That the identity of the employer of the witness now before the Court, MP, be suppressed and nothing be published which would identify or tend to identify the name or identity of the said employer.
Catchwords:	CRIME – Suppression Orders for name of witness’ employer in circumstances where publication has been shown to have detrimental effect on employment of, or future prospects of employment of, witness – necessary in the interests of the administration of justice – balance with open justice not problematic because the name of employer does not impact on public hearing of all relevant issues
Legislation Cited:	Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW)
Category:	Procedural rulings
Parties:	Regina (Crown) BB (a pseudonym) (Accused)
Representation:	Counsel: M McHugh SC / A McGrath (Crown) S Pararajasingham (Accused) Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) (Crown) Musgrave Legal (Accused)
File Number(s):	2016/321930
Publication restriction:	Suppression orders made under s 7(1) of the Court Suppression and NPO Act 2010 (NSW)

EX TEMPORE Judgment

1. HIS HONOUR: Before the Court is a matter raised with the Court, which brings into play the provisions of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW). It is necessary for the Court to bear in mind the overriding and important public interest, or primary objective, in the administration of justice that proceedings before the Court should be open and able to be assessed and/or dealt with by all, including the press.

2. Nevertheless, issues have been raised on the voir dire relating to the embarrassment caused to the witness, who is currently before the Court giving evidence, and that embarrassment is caused by the confined nature of the industry in which he works and the problem associated with knowledge that he may or may not be the subject of interest by the Australian Federal Police, even though that interest is confined, as I understand it, and as I know it, to interest as a witness to the conduct of others.

3. It seems to me, notwithstanding the primary objective in the administration of justice to safeguard the public interest in open justice, it is necessary in the public interest for an order to be made suppressing the identity of the employer of the witness. I take the view that public interest significantly outweighs the public interest in open justice. I do so because of the embarrassment caused but, more fundamentally, because the Court, in my view, should not act in a way that prejudices the interests of witnesses; otherwise witnesses will be less forthcoming in giving evidence before the Court.

4. As a consequence, I make orders under the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) in the following terms:

1. That the identity of the employer of the witness now before the Court, MP, be suppressed and nothing be published which would identify or tend to identify the name or identity of the said employer.

**********

Amendments

08 December 2021 - Pseudonym updated.

Decision last updated: 08 December 2021