R v Cliff (No 4)

Case •

[2018] NSWSC 165

•

16 February 2018

No judgment structure available for this case.

Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Cliff (No 4) [2018] NSWSC 165
Hearing dates: 16 February 2018
Date of orders: 16 February 2018
Decision date: 16 February 2018
Jurisdiction:Common Law
Before: Campbell J
Decision:

(1) Grant access to the media to Ex X1;

 (2) Order under the provision s 7 of Court Suppression and Non-Publication Act 2010 (NSW) to prohibit broadcasting part of Ex X1
Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – media application - grant of access – order of suppression on part
Legislation Cited: Court Suppression and Non-Publication Act 2010 (NSW), ss 7, 8
Cases Cited: Nil.
Texts Cited: Nil.
Category:Procedural and other rulings
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Bryce Cliff (Accused)
Representation:

Counsel:
M Pincott (Crown)
E Wilson SC (Accused)

  Solicitor:
M McFarlane (Office Director of Public Prosecutions)
(Crown)
A Van der Velde (Matouk Joyner Lawyers)
(Accused)
File Number(s): 2016/175505

EX TEMPORE Judgment (revised)

  1. I will not repeat what I said in my third judgment in the case where I set out the principles.

  2. Generally speaking, other than for good reason, of which there may be many, the media is entitled to access to exhibits which have been actually tendered in court for the purpose solely, of course, of providing a fair and accurate report of the proceedings.

  3. I am conscious of the fact that it could be said that footage of this type is required simply to provide vision either on the television or in on online versions of newspapers by way of streaming to illustrate a story, and that perhaps it does not necessarily amount to fair reporting.

  4. On the other hand, I think that given the force of the general rule and the role of the media as adjunctive to the open justice principle, I am prepared to grant access to the media to Ex X1.

  5. I however noticed, during the running of it, that the last section, which was from a camera showing outside the nearside of the taxi, showed a home, I assume, in Wollongong and I direct that that part of the footage may not be broadcast. I make that order under the provisions of s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Act 2010 (NSW) on the ground specified in s 8(1) para (c) that the order may be necessary to protect the safety of the occupants of those premises.

**********

Decision last updated: 28 February 2018

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

1