Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited

HIS HONOUR: By notice of motion filed in Court this afternoon, the Commissioner of Police, under subpoena, makes a claim for public interest immunity in respect of documents produced to the Court in answer to a subpoena issued by the plaintiff in these proceedings.

I have read the affidavit of Deputy Commissioner Moroney sworn today and confidential exhibits A1 and A2.

The ground for the claim of public interest immunity rests in one of the accepted categories thereof.

Mr Hall of counsel, for the plaintiff, suffers the usual disadvantage attendant on a legal representative in his position in such an application as this. He can, however, and does, point to exhibit 42 in the action, a public exhibit, as providing an unusual component to be taken into account in determining the Commissioner's claim.

The specific exhibit, in my view, does not derogate from the validity of the claim made in the general sense, amplified in the material I have considered.

In the light of well-known authorities in this area of the law, I uphold the claim for public interest immunity.