The Paradox of Public Disclosure: Hogan v Australian Crime Commision
Date
2010
Authors
Bannister, J.
Editors
Advisors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Type:
Journal article
Citation
The Sydney Law Review, 2010; 32(1):159-175
Statement of Responsibility
Judith Bannister
Conference Name
Abstract
Actor Paul Hogan is before the High Court attempting to keep his personal financial and taxation information out of the newspapers. The documents being fought over were put into evidence by Paul Hogan’s lawyers to support an application for further and better discovery in proceedings claiming legal professional privilege over documents seized by the Australian Crime Commission. The principle of open justice requires full public disclosure of court proceedings unless publication of the information would prejudice the administration of justice. It is argued in this article that the protection of information flows to the courts is fundamental to the administration of justice and that the search for truth may sometimes justify restrictions on publication. Having said that, it is by no means clear that the public interest in full disclosure should necessarily save Paul Hogan’s personal information from public disclosure in this case.
School/Discipline
Dissertation Note
Provenance
Description
Access Status
Rights
(c) 2010 LBC Information Services