Lawyers for a high-profile man accused of rape have been reprimanded by a Queensland judge for failing to promptly submit their application for a judicial review to keep their client’s name secret.
The man’s identity will remain protected following a decision in Brisbane’s supreme court on Tuesday to extend an interim non-publication order.
The man has been charged with two counts of raping a woman in October 2021, with the case working its way through early committal proceedings at Toowoomba magistrates court this year. He has not yet been committed to stand trial.
Last Friday, the man lost a legal battle in Toowoomba magistrates court to maintain his anonymity. However, it was ruled that his identity would remain secret pending a request for a review from his defence team.
They were given until 4pm on Tuesday to lodge their request for review to prevent him from being named.
The court heard that the man’s lawyer, Rowan King, had emailed the court at 3.43pm on Monday asking it to hear a review “as promptly as possible”.
But come Tuesday morning, the man’s lawyers had not filed the paperwork for the application for a judicial review.
“The magistrate has either made an error … or the magistrate didn’t. You’ve had since Friday to prepare an application for a judicial review?” Justice Peter Applegarth asked the defence.
“Why aren’t you standing up now and seeking leave to file a judicial review?”
The man’s defence barrister, Andrew Hoare, apologised that he had not lodged an application sooner and said that they were awaiting magistrate Clare Kelly’s decision being published.
“The decision will not crystallise until 4pm today… upon that occurring then there will be a… judicial review,” he said.
Hoare said the defence had not been given a transcript of the hearing and needed to view it before lodging an application.
“I just don’t have sufficient notes of those reasons, I’m not trying to delay,” Hoare said.
But Applegarth said the man’s lawyers had been present in Toowoomba magistrates court on Friday and should have been able to take notes of the decision.
He directed journalists who had attended court on Friday to provide audio recordings to the man’s lawyers.
The court later heard the audio recordings provided were “incomprehensible” and the decision of the magistrate needed to be transcribed, which would take at least 24 hours.
The judge allowed for the defence to file the application for judicial review by Thursday, with submissions to follow on Monday.
In court on Tuesday, Hoare argued Kelly had made an “error of law” by not finding there was a “risk of substantial harm” to his client if he was named.
Kelly on Friday dismissed such arguments made by his lawyers when seeking a permanent non-publication order.
Hoare had argued that concealing his client’s identity was a “limited interference in the principle of open justice”. He said it was necessary to prevent the potential risk of self-harm.
Hoare also presented a psychological diagnosis, which described a “consequential deterioration” in his client’s mental health.
Kelly acknowledged the defendant’s “vulnerabilities” but noted he was not currently linked with a mental health professional nor was there any evidence he was being prescribed medication for his mental health.
The man’s identity had previously been protected under Queensland law, which prohibited media companies from naming accused sex offenders until they were committed to stand trial.
However, Queensland passed laws last month to allow the naming of accused sex offenders after they are charged. The change brings the state into line with most other states and territories.
Numerous media companies, including Guardian Australia, ABC, Nine, News Corp publications and Network Ten, have opposed the man’s application to maintain his anonymity.
The next hearing is expected to be held on Thursday, 26 October.
