Rich v Attorney General of New South Wales

The case of *Rich v Attorney General of New South Wales* concerned a judicial review of a Coroner's decision to compel a witness to give evidence at an inquest, despite the witness's objection. The witness sought to challenge the Coroner's determination that the "interests of justice" required the evidence to be given, and also raised issues regarding the interpretation of statutory provisions relating to objections and the conferral of use immunity.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Coroner had erred in law by requiring the witness to give evidence over objection, and the proper interpretation of the phrase "interests of justice" in this context. The court also considered whether a "global" objection to giving evidence was permissible under the relevant legislation, which appeared to contemplate objections to "particular evidence" or evidence on a "particular matter." Further, the court examined potential conflicts between the immunity conferred by a certificate issued under the *Coroners Act 2009* and the requirement to have regard to reasons under the *Industrial Relations Act 1996*.

The court reasoned that the Coroner's decision was not amenable to judicial review, as no judicially reviewable error had been demonstrated. It was held that the Coroner was satisfied that the interests of justice required the evidence, and this satisfaction was not demonstrably irrational or based on an error of law. The court found that a typographical error in the Coroner's reasons and a failure to address one submission did not materially affect the decision. Regarding the statutory interpretation, the court applied the principle that a later, specific Act (the *Coroners Act 2009*) prevails over an earlier, general Act (the *Industrial Relations Act 1996*), particularly given the explicit wording in the latter Act that it does not limit the admissibility of proceedings in other courts or tribunals.

Leave to appeal was granted, and the draft notice of appeal was made the operative notice. The appellant was ordered to pay the filing fee within seven days, with further filing and service requirements dispensed with. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed with costs.