KK v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: KK v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 874
Hearing dates: 23 June 2016
Date of orders: 23 June 2016
Decision date: 23 June 2016
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Davies J
Decision:
1. That the Plaintiff be granted leave to commence and continue these proceedings by a pseudonym KK.
2. Pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010, the name and address of the Plaintiff and any member of his family not be published without the leave of the Court by reason of s 8(1)(e) of the Act.
3. No order as to costs.
4. These orders are to be entered forthwith.

Catchwords: PROCEDURE – application to commence proceedings by plaintiff using a pseudonym and for suppression of the plaintiff’s identity – plaintiff physically and emotionally abused as a minor by defendants – claims made in respect of abuse
Legislation Cited: Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW)
Cases Cited: AA v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd [2016] NSWC 236
Witness v Marsden & Anor [2000] NSWCA 52
Category: Procedural and other rulings
Parties: KK (Plaintiff)
Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd (First Defendant)
Sharman Okan (Second Defendant)
Representation:
Counsel:
J Lonergan SC (Plaintiff)
No appearances (Defendants)
Solicitors:
Carroll & O’Dea (Plaintiff)

File Number(s): 2016/191461

Judgment

The Plaintiff by Notice of Motion seeks leave to bring proceedings using a pseudonym and asks that the Court make a suppression or non-publication order under s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) in relation to the identity of the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiff claims against the Defendants for physical and emotional abuse during the time that he lived at the Ashram conducted by the First Defendant.
The First Defendant is sued as having vicarious liability for the deceased person who was in effect the manager of the Ashram. The Second Defendant performed the role of significant female supervisor of children at the Ashram during the years 1976 to 1986 when the Plaintiff was at the Ashram.
Although the Plaintiff does not claim sexual abuse against these Defendants, he gave evidence at the Royal Commission because of its concern with the institutional response of the Ashram to all manner of abuse that was alleged to have taken place at about that time at the Ashram. The Plaintiff nevertheless seeks the use of the pseudonym because of the seriousness of his mental condition and its exacerbation, particularly as a result of the evidence that he gave publicly at the Royal Commission.
The affidavit of the solicitor in support of the Motion indicates that the Plaintiff has subsequently become distressed due to the public knowledge of his experiences related at the Royal Commission. He was shortly after that time admitted to the Gold Coast Mental Health Service as a result.
The report from Professor Lorraine Dennerstein of 30 May 2016 makes reference to his worsening mental health after giving evidence at the Royal Commission. She diagnoses him as having chronic post-traumatic stress disorder, marijuana dependency and bi-polar II disorder.
The application is also put on the basis of protection of the Plaintiff's two sons who are aged 17 and 4 and a half.
In AA v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd [2016] NSWC 236 I made reference to what was said by the Court of Appeal in Witness v Marsden [200] NSWCA 52 at 14, 17 and 140. It seems to me that if it was appropriate that a mere witness in proceedings be given the protection of anonymity by a pseudonym, it is appropriate in the present case where it is clear that the Plaintiff's mental health is related to the abuse that he received at the Ashram and has been exacerbated by his giving evidence publically about it at the Royal Commission. It is appropriate that the orders sought should be made.
I make these orders:

1. That the Plaintiff be granted leave to commence and continue these proceedings by a pseudonym KK.

2. Pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010, the name and address of the Plaintiff and any member of his family not be published without the leave of the Court by reason of s 8(1)(e) of the Act.

3. No order as to costs.

4. These orders are to be entered forthwith.

**********

The case of KK v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd involved a plaintiff who sought to commence proceedings against the defendants, Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd and others, for physical and emotional abuse suffered as a minor. The plaintiff applied to use a pseudonym and for the suppression of their identity. The matter was before the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff alleged that they were subjected to abuse at the hands of the defendants over a number of years, and sought damages for the harm caused.

The legal issues before the court centred on whether the plaintiff could use a pseudonym and whether their identity should be suppressed. The plaintiff argued that using their real name would cause significant emotional distress and potentially put them at risk of further harm. The defendants opposed the application on the grounds that it would impede their ability to properly defend the claims. The court needed to weigh the plaintiff's right to privacy and protection against the defendants' right to a fair trial.

The court determined that the plaintiff's application should be granted. It found that the potential distress and risk to the plaintiff from using their real name outweighed the defendants' right to know the identity of the person making the claims. The court also noted that the defendants would still be able to obtain necessary information to defend the case while protecting the plaintiff's identity. The plaintiff was therefore permitted to use a pseudonym and their identity was suppressed in all court documents and proceedings.

The final orders included that the plaintiff could proceed with the use of the pseudonym "KK" and that their identity would be suppressed throughout the litigation process. The defendants were directed to respond to the claims as if they were made by KK, and all court documents were to refer to the plaintiff as KK. The case was to proceed on the basis that the plaintiff's identity would remain confidential.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

Medium Neutral Citation:	KK v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 874
Hearing dates:	23 June 2016
Date of orders:	23 June 2016
Decision date:	23 June 2016
Jurisdiction:	Common Law
Before:	Davies J
Decision:	1. That the Plaintiff be granted leave to commence and continue these proceedings by a pseudonym KK. 2. Pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010, the name and address of the Plaintiff and any member of his family not be published without the leave of the Court by reason of s 8(1)(e) of the Act. 3. No order as to costs. 4. These orders are to be entered forthwith.
Catchwords:	PROCEDURE – application to commence proceedings by plaintiff using a pseudonym and for suppression of the plaintiff’s identity – plaintiff physically and emotionally abused as a minor by defendants – claims made in respect of abuse
Legislation Cited:	Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	AA v Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd [2016] NSWC 236 Witness v Marsden & Anor [2000] NSWCA 52
Category:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	KK (Plaintiff) Satyananda Ashram Pty Ltd (First Defendant) Sharman Okan (Second Defendant)
Representation:	Counsel: J Lonergan SC (Plaintiff) No appearances (Defendants) Solicitors: Carroll & O’Dea (Plaintiff)
File Number(s):	2016/191461