There is no law or rule of practice in Western Australia that an appellant's name will be suppressed where an appeal against conviction for sexual offences is allowed and the prosecution is subsequently discontinued. Personal prejudice suffered by a former accused — including social stigma, employment difficulties, and psychological impact — does not, without more, outweigh the open-court principle so as to justify a pseudonym order. The pseudonym practice in sexual offence appeals exists to protect complainants under s 36C of the Evidence Act 1906 (WA), not to protect appellants.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.