R v Sinai (No 2)

The case before the court involved the Crown seeking suppression and non-publication orders in relation to material online that was argued to be prejudicial to the accused, Mr Sinai. The application was dismissed by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The primary issue for the court was whether the orders sought by the Crown were necessary to ensure a fair trial for Mr Sinai. The court had to determine if the existing online material was sufficiently prejudicial to warrant suppression and if the orders would actually achieve the desired outcome.

The court found that the content of the approximately 100 internet articles in question was unclear and that identifying specific articles was problematic. Additionally, the articles were old and the likelihood of them being accessed by potential jurors was minimal. The court emphasised that the orders sought were essentially futile as they would not effectively remove the existing prejudicial material from the internet. The court concluded that the orders were not necessary to ensure a fair trial and dismissed the application for suppression and non-publication orders.

The court's decision was based on the impracticality of attempting to control the dissemination of online content, particularly when the content in question was not easily identifiable and was of questionable relevance to the trial. The court held that the Crown's application for orders to take down the articles was dismissed as the orders were not necessary to prevent prejudice to the accused. The court's decision highlighted the difficulties in managing online content in the context of criminal trials and the importance of considering the practicality and effectiveness of proposed remedies.