R v Q & M

In the High Court of New Zealand, Auckland Registry, Fairfax Media applied for access to certain documents from the file of R v Q & M. The defendants, Q and M, had previously been granted name suppression orders, and the Crown opposed the application on the basis that it might facilitate publication of their names and identifying details. The defendants also opposed the application due to the risk of their identification. The court was required to decide which documents should be released, while balancing the right to a fair trial with the public's right to be informed, and ensuring that the suppression orders remained in effect.

The court considered the competing submissions and the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2012. It concluded that Fairfax Media should have access to certain parts of the file, including judgments, indictments, formal written statements, sentencing submissions, and applications for name suppression. However, testimonial letters and victim impact statements should not be disclosed due to the private information they contained. The court also ruled that private information, such as the contact addresses of counsel and names of registry staff, should be redacted to protect the privacy interests of individuals involved in the proceeding.

In summary, the court granted Fairfax Media access to the redacted file, while ensuring that the suppression orders remained in place. It found that releasing the file in this form allowed for fair and accurate reporting of the proceeding, while also protecting the privacy interests of the defendants and other individuals involved.

The final orders of the court were that Fairfax Media should have access to the redacted file, with specific redactions to ensure compliance with the suppression orders and protection of privacy interests. Fairfax Media was also required to ensure that it did not breach the suppression orders through any subsequent publication.