The Queen v The Herald & Weekly Times Pty Ltd (Ruling No 2)

In this case, the Herald & Weekly Times Pty Ltd was prosecuted by the Queen for alleged contempt of court. The dispute arose from the publication of articles that were said to breach a suppression order and to constitute sub judice contempt. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The legal issues revolved around the applicability of civil procedure to contempt of court proceedings and the tests for establishing breach of a suppression order and sub judice contempt. The court was required to determine whether the publications had a real tendency to interfere with the administration of justice and whether they breached the suppression order.

The court considered the nature of contempt of court and the tests for breach of suppression order and sub judice contempt. It noted that the appropriate test for establishing contempt was an objective one, focusing on the practical tendency of the publications to interfere with the administration of justice. The court applied the principles from Protean (Holdings) Ltd (receivers and managers appointed) v American Home Assurance Co, which established that the consequences of the conduct did not need to be proven. Instead, the court was to assess the practical tendency of the publications. The court found that the publications had a real tendency, as a matter of practical reality, to interfere with the administration of justice. The inference was that readers could ascertain suppressed information by conducting internet searches, which frustrated the purpose of the suppression order.

Ultimately, the court found the publications in breach of both the suppression order and constituting sub judice contempt. It held that the applicant was not required to prove the consequences of the conduct, as the objective assessment of the effect of the content of the publication in context was sufficient. The court's reasoning was grounded in an objective assessment of the practical tendency of the publications and the need to protect the integrity of the judicial process. The final orders of the court were to be determined based on the findings that the publications had breached the suppression order and constituted sub judice contempt.