Stoddard and Prescott

In *Stoddard & Prescott* [2011] FamCA 694, the Family Court of Australia considered an application by Mr Stoddard, an officer of Victoria Police, for access to certain documents filed in previous Family Court proceedings between Mr Prescott and his now deceased wife, Ms D. Mr Stoddard was responsible for criminal proceedings against Mr Prescott, who was charged with offences relating to the alleged transmission of Hepatitis C to female patients. Mr Stoddard sought access to affidavits sworn by Mr Prescott and reports from medical practitioners concerning Ms D, which he believed would be relevant to the prosecution.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether to grant Mr Stoddard access to the requested Family Court records, and if so, under what conditions. This involved considering the provisions of Rule 24.13 of the *Family Law Rules 2004*, which permits the Court to grant access to its records to persons with a proper interest, and Rule 24.12, which allows for the removal of documents from the court file. The Court also had to consider the implications of section 121 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) regarding the publication of proceedings and the protection of parties and children.

Justice Cronin reasoned that Mr Stoddard had a legitimate interest in the documents for the purpose of the prosecution proceedings. Applying Rule 24.13(2), the Court determined that access could be granted on conditions. While acknowledging Mr Prescott's concerns about media notoriety and the potential impact on his children, the Court found that issues of evidence admissibility were for the criminal courts to determine. Crucially, to address concerns arising from section 121, both parties agreed to oppose any future applications by media outlets for the release of the documents for publication.

Consequently, the Court made orders releasing specific affidavits to Mr Stoddard for use in the prosecution proceedings, subject to the condition that he and any officer engaged in the prosecution would oppose any application by persons other than the respondent and the Crown for inspection or publication of these documents. The Court dismissed Mr Stoddard's outstanding application filed on 20 July 2011, and ordered that the reasons for judgment be transcribed and made available to both parties. The judgment was published under a pseudonym with the approval of the Chief Justice.