Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 14)

• Jurisdiction: Australia Federal only
• Court: Federal Court
• Judgment Date: 24 May 2021
• Neutral Citation: [2021] FCA 552
• Date: 24 May 2021

Federal Court of Australia

Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 14) [2021] FCA 552

File number(s):	NSD 1485 of 2018 NSD 1486 of 2018 NSD 1487 of 2018
Judgment of:	ABRAHAM J
Date of judgment:	24 May 2021
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - claim by the Inspector‑General of Australian Defence Force (IGADF) and the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) to public interest immunity over documents, if they exist, which relate to witnesses that are to be called by the respondents – where it is accepted there are public interest consideration on both sides - consideration of balancing competing public interest considerations - order made for the IGADF to file any further confidential evidence in support of the claim – held that if the AFP documents exist the balance weighs in favour of non-disclosure
Legislation:	Defence Act 1903 (Cth) ss 110B, 110C, 110E, 124 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force Regulation 2016 (Cth) ss 19, 21, 22, 23, 29, 32 National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 (Cth) s 38B
Cases cited:	AB (a Pseudonym) v CD (a Pseudonym) [2018] HCA 58; (2018) 362 ALR 1 Alfred Crompton Amusement Machines Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners (No 2) [1974] AC 405 Al Rawi & Ors v Security Service & Ors [2011] UKSC 34; [2012] 1 AC 531 Alister v The Queen [1984] HCA 85; (1984) 154 CLR 404 Asahi Holdings (Australia) Pty Ltd v Pacific Equity Partners Pty Ltd (No 2) [2014] FCA 481; (2014) 312 ALR 403 Assistant Commissioner Condon v Pompano Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 7; (2013) 252 CLR 38 Attorney-General (NSW) v Lipton [2012] NSWCCA 156 Attorney-General (NSW) v Stuart (1994) 34 NSWLR 667 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 32; 174 FCR 547 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v P Dawson Nominees Pty Ltd [2008] FCAFC 123; (2008) 169 FCR 227 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Prysmian Cavi E Sistemi Energia S.R.L. [2011] FCA 938; (2011) 283 ALR 137 Beneficial Finance Corporation Ltd v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (1991) 31 FCR 523; Beneficial Finance Corporation Ltd v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (1991) 52 A Crim R 423 Burmah Oil Co Ltd v Bank of England [1980] AC 1090 Cain v Glass (No 2) (1985) 3 NSWLR 230 Carol Ann Matthews v SPI Electricity Pty Ltd [2014] VSC 65 Carson v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd [1993] HCA 31; (1993) 178 CLR 44 Church of Scientology Inc v Woodward [1982] HCA 78; (1982) 154 CLR 25 Commonwealth v Northern Land Council [1993] HCA 24; (1993) 176 CLR 604 Commonwealth v Northern Land Council (1991) 30 FCR 1 Conway v Rimmer [1968] AC 910 D v National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (1978) AC 171 Director of Public Prosecutions v Smith (1996) 86 A Crim R 308 Esso Australia Resources Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1999] HCA 67; (1999) 201 CLR 49 Gypsy Jokers Motorcycle Club Inc v Commissioner of Police [2008] HCA 4; (2008) 234 CLR 532 HT v The Queen [2019] HCA 40; (2019) 278 A Crim R 133 Jarvie v Magistrates' Court of Victoria [1995] 1 VR 84 Marinovich v Director of Public Prosecutions & Anor (1987) 14 ALD 315 National Crime Authority v Gould (1989) 23 FCR 191 Polley v Johnson [2013] NSWSC 543 R v Khayat (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 1315 R v Lodhi [2006] NSWSC 596; (2006) 199 FLR 270 R v Meissner (1994) 76 A Crim R 81 R v Smith (1996) 86 A Crim R 308 Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 6) [2020] FCA 1285 Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 5) [2020] FCA 1067 Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 8) [2020] FCA 1630 Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 10) [2021] FCA 317 Rogers v Home Department State Secretary [1973] AC 388 Sankey v Whitlam [1978] HCA 43; (1978) 142 CLR 1 SDCV v Director-General of Security [2021] FCAFC 51 Spargos Mining NL v Standard Chartered Australia Ltd (No 1) (1989) 1 ACSR 311 The Australian Statistician v Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd [2008] WASCA 34; (2008) 36 WAR 83 Young v Quin (1985) 4 FCR 483
Division:	General Division
Registry:	New South Wales
National Practice Area:	Other Federal Jurisdiction
Number of paragraphs:	167 (including Confidential reasons)
Date of hearing:	7 May 2021
Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr A Moses SC with Mr P Sharp
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Mark O’Brien Legal
Counsel for the Respondents:	Mr C Mitchell
Solicitor for the Respondents:	Minter Ellison
Counsel for the Inspector‑General of the Australian Defence Force	Mr A Berger QC with Mr J Edwards and C Ernst
Solicitor for the Inspector‑General of the Australian Defence Force	Australian Government Solicitor
Counsel for the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police	Mr E Muston SC with Ms B Anniwell
Solicitor for the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police	Australian Government Solicitor

ORDERS

		NSD 1485 of 2018
BETWEEN:	BEN ROBERTS-SMITH Applicant
AND:	FAIRFAX MEDIA PUBLICATIONS PTY LIMITED (ACN 003 357 720) (and others named in the Schedule) First Respondent

		NSD 1486 of 2018
BETWEEN:	BEN ROBERTS-SMITH Applicant
AND:	THE AGE COMPANY PTY LIMITED (ACN 004 262 702) (and others named in the Schedule) First Respondent

		NSD 1487 of 2018
BETWEEN:	BEN ROBERTS-SMITH Applicant
AND:	THE FEDERAL CAPITAL PRESS OF AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED (ACN 008 394 063) (and others named in the Schedule) First Respondent

order made by:	Abraham J
DATE OF ORDER:	24 mAY 2021

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The Proper Officer of the Australian Federal Police is excused from the obligation to state whether the Australian Federal Police has possession of documents answering the description set out in the subpoena dated 23 December 2020 issued by the Applicant as amended on 6 May 2021 and from the obligation to produce any such documents.

2. Pursuant to s 37AF of the of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) (the Act) and on the...