› Inherent jurisdiction — stricter test than statutory power
Practice and procedure
› Open justice
› Evidentiary burden — cogent evidence of necessity required
Quick Take
1A suppression order under s 57 of the Evidence Act 1939 (NT) requires that non-publication be 'desirable' in the interests of the administration of justice; the stricter inherent jurisdiction test requires the order to be 'reasonably necessary' to secure the proper administration of justice — mere belief, desire to avoid embarrassment, or generalised fear of reprisal unsupported by cogent evidence is insufficient.
2Where a plaintiff has previously litigated similar claims without anonymity, is no longer employed by the body against which allegations are made, and adduces no evidence of actual reprisal, the evidentiary foundation for necessity is not established.
3An interim suppression order made to preserve the status quo pending determination of the application cannot provide a 'bootstraps' basis for making the order permanent.
