The Suppression Rort
- Opened on fileThe secrecy you can buy
Open justice with a price of admission. Interim secrecy is most available to those with the resources to assemble it, the orders that matter escape the Act that is supposed to govern them, and nobody can even say how many exist.
Fig. 02 / What happened
Fig. 03 / Who the record names
How we know
The exhibits sit beside the title above, each tied to the article that documented it. How evidence and sources are graded: evidence grade, source tiers.
What else is connected
Named in this case and in others. A count of where the record names them, not a finding about what they did.
From the desk
- Watch: did the Open Courts Act pledge survive the 28 November electionThe order the Act cannot reach · The Suppression RortThe Suppression Rort
Read the desk note
Check whether the Carroll and Kilkenny pledge of 11 August 2026 survived the election result, whether a bill amending the Open Courts Act 2013 has been introduced, and whether it reaches interim orders or only orders held after conviction. The week after the election is this desk's own date, not drawn from any calendar entry; election day itself is tracked separately.
- Watch: the open threads in the suppression follow-upThe order the Act cannot reach · The Suppression RortThe Suppression Rort
Read the desk note
Check the outcome of the Queensland costs submissions listed for 7 September 2026, read AB v Australian Broadcasting Corporation [2026] NSWSC 767 at first hand to confirm the 1 July 2026 date the article now prints from Inforrm and Mediaweek (the primary text has not been opened), and check whether Carr's lawyers have filed the flagged appeal to the Court of Appeal, not confirmed as filed or decided as of 9 September 2026. One month on is this desk's own reading, not a date drawn from any document.
- Correction publishedThe secrecy you can buy · The Suppression Rort
This section dated Women's Agenda's report on the post-verdict interim order to early August 2026. The article is dated 29 July 2026, and the text and reference now say so. Reference now carries the headline the AAP page currently shows, with its original title noted.
- Correction publishedThe order the Act cannot reach · The Suppression Rort
This section said three sources gave three different dates for AB v Australian Broadcasting Corporation NSWSC 767 and that none could be printed as settled. Inforrm and Mediaweek both date the ruling to 1 July 2026, and the 13 August 2026 date this article attributed to the court's reasons is the posting date of the UTS Faculty of Law case note. The section, its fact box and the sidebar now give…
- Correction publishedThe secrecy you can buy · The Suppression Rort
This section said pseudonym and concealment orders 'go uncounted, as Bosland set out in The Conversation'. Bosland's article sets out that these orders sit outside the Open Courts Act and operate as de facto suppression orders; that no count of them was located is this outlet's own finding, and the sentence now says so. Reference, which pointed only to The Conversation's home page, now gives the…
- Record: suppression follow-up published as article 2; Carr named in article 1The order the Act cannot reach · The Suppression RortThe Suppression Rort · attended 9 September 2026
Read the desk note
ATTENDED 9 September 2026 (audit item: suppression follow-up, due before 28 November 2026).
FINDING. Ralph Carr, previously the unnamed 'entertainment and sports manager' in article 1, can now be named: his suppression order lapsed on 3 August 2026 when his own legal team abandoned the extension application, not by any ruling against him. He was sentenced on 25 August 2026 to six years with a four-year non-parole period, after a stay application was argued and rejected. An appeal has been flagged but not confirmed as filed or decided. In Queensland, a non-publication order over an unnamed man was upheld on judicial review on 28 August 2026, resting on the court's inherent power to protect the administration of justice rather than any statute. In New South Wales, the Supreme Court restrained a broadcaster and suppressed four identities in AB v Australian Broadcasting Corporation, resting on inherent jurisdiction and equitable breach of confidence rather than the state's own suppression orders Act. Neither interstate mechanism sits inside the Open Courts Act 2013 that Victoria's pledge would amend.
ARTICLE CHANGES. Article 2, 'The order the Act cannot reach', published, setting out the interstate comparison. Article 1, 'The secrecy you can buy', updated: the byline now reads 'updated 9 September 2026'; the passage on the second case in 'The order finishes its work before the verdict' was rewritten to name Carr and add the stay application, the sentence and the flagged appeal; a new key fact was added recording Carr's naming and sentence; and references [13] and [14] were added to support the sentence and the stay application.
STILL OPEN: the outcome of the Queensland costs submissions listed for 7 September 2026, the true date of AB v Australian Broadcasting Corporation [2026] NSWSC 767, and Carr's flagged appeal, none of them confirmed as of this date.
NEXT DATE: watches set for 9 October 2026 and 4 December 2026.