A court order requiring media organisations to remove archived articles from their websites will not be upheld where the same material remains accessible on cached and other websites, rendering the order ineffective. The necessity for such an order must be assessed having regard to the practical realities of internet publication, including the permanence, ubiquity, and replicability of online material. The inherent jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to make suppression orders extends to non-parties and is not displaced by ss 18 and 19 of the Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic). An appellate court will be slow to interfere with a trial judge's discretion in making suppression orders, given the trial judge's familiarity with the atmosphere of the trial and community.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 43 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 43 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.