Marshall v Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption

[2026] VSC 582

Supreme Court of Victoria

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

Statutory confidentiality regimes governing an investigative body such as IBAC do not, absent express provision, impliedly restrict a court from disclosing in published reasons for judgment information obtained by that body and tendered in evidence, particularly after the investigation has concluded and a report has been published.
The trade secrets analogy for redacting court reasons does not extend to judicial review proceedings challenging investigative decisions: unlike trade secrets cases where disclosure destroys the subject matter of the proceeding, the efficacy of judicial review is not undermined by disclosing the evidentiary basis for the court's determination.
The threshold for redacting reasons for judgment requires the party seeking redaction to establish a real risk of injury or harm to the administration of justice, not merely that the information was previously confidential or that its disclosure may cause reputational harm.