Federal Court of Australia

GTO26 by their litigation representative GTS26 v Board of Trustees of the Brisbane Grammar School (operating as Brisbane Grammar School) [2026] FCA 809

ORDERS

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.    The name of the Respondent be amended to read “Board of Trustees of the Brisbane Grammar School (operating as Brisbane Grammar School)”.

2.    Order 15 of the Orders of Longbottom J dated 16 June 2026 is vacated.

3.    Pursuant to s 37AF of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), on the ground in s 37AG(1)(a) of the Federal Court Act, from the date of these Orders:

(a)    the Applicant be identified in this proceeding, including in all documents filed in the proceeding, by the pseudonym “GTO26”;

(b)    the litigation representative be identified in this proceeding, including in all documents filed in the proceeding, by the pseudonym “GTS26”;

(c)    the father of the Applicant be identified in this proceeding, including in all documents filed in the proceeding, by the pseudonym “GTU26”;

(d)    the child identified in the originating application filed on 4 March 2026 as “Child X” be identified in this proceeding, including in all documents filed in the proceeding, by the pseudonym “GTZ26”;

(e)    any other child identified or referenced in this proceeding as a comparator for the purposes of s 5 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth), including in all documents filed in the proceeding, be identified by the pseudonym “Child” and a corresponding and consecutive “alphabetic reference”, commencing with “Child A”; and

(f)    any parent of a child identified referred to in order 3(e), including in all documents filed in the proceeding, be identified by the pseudonym “Parent” and a corresponding and consecutive “alphabetic reference”, commencing with “Parent A”.

4.    The title of the proceeding is amended to read “GTO26 by their litigation representative GTS26 v Board of Trustees of the Brisbane Grammar School (operating as Brisbane Grammar School)”.

5.    The Orders of Longbottom J dated 16 June 2026, 17 June 2026 and 19 June 2026, be amended to include the pseudonyms referred to in order 3.

6.    The following documents are to be treated as confidential for the purposes of r 2.32

of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), so as to give effect to order 3:

(a)    the originating application and accompanying documents filed on 4 March 2026;

(b)    the Applicant’s interlocutory application and affidavit of GTS26 filed on 4 June 2026;

(c)    the Respondent’s notice of address for service filed on 20 April 2026;

(d)    the Applicant’s Genuine Steps Statement filed on 12 June 2026;

(e)    the parties’ joint submissions in support of agreed proposed short minutes of order, filed on 22 June 2026; and

(f)    any transcripts of the case management hearing on 16 June 2026, and the interlocutory hearing on 24 June 2026, that identify by name, the persons referred to in order 3.

7.    By 4:00 pm AEST on 23 June 2026, the Applicant (by their litigation representative) file:

(a)    an amended originating application and accompanying documents in the form of the originating document filed on 4 March 2026, save that the Applicant’s name and any child and/or parent’s name be replaced, wherever it appears, by the pseudonym stated in order 3; and

(b)    the Applicant’s Genuine Steps Statement in the form of the original document filed on 12 June 2026, save that the title be replaced in accordance with order 4.

8.    By 4:00 pm AEST on 23 June 2026, the Respondent file:

(a)    the Respondent’s notice of address for service in the form of the original document filed on 20 April 2026, save that the title be replaced in accordance with order 4; and

(b)    the parties’ joint submissions in support of agreed proposed short minutes of order in the form filed on 22 June 2026, save that the title be replaced in accordance with order 4 and the litigation representative’s name be replaced, wherever it appears, by the pseudonym stated in order 3.

9.    Pursuant to s 37AF of the Federal Court Act, on the ground in s 37AG(1)(a) of the Federal Court Act, it is prohibited to publish or disclose information which directly identifies the persons referred to in order 3.

10.    Order 9 does not prohibit publication or disclosure of any information if the publication or disclosure is made:

(a)    by the parties or their legal representatives or any officer or employee of the Court for purposes connected with, or relating to, the proper conduct of this proceeding; or

(b)    with the consent of the parties or with the leave of the Court.

11.    Orders 3, 6 and 9 will operate up to the date that final judgment is delivered in the proceeding, or the proceeding is otherwise finalised by Court order.

Note:    Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

LONGBOTTOM J:

overview

1    The parties seek pseudonym orders under s 37AF of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) with respect to the Applicant (who is a minor) and any other child who is, or may be, referenced in the proceeding. With the exception of the Applicant’s parents, the parties also seek anonymisation of the name of the parents of any children who are, or may be, referenced in the proceeding on the basis that the disclosure of their name is likely to lead to identification of their child.

2    The proceeding was commenced by originating application filed on 4 March 2026, following termination of a complaint made by the Applicant’s parents to the Australian Human Rights Commission: Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth), s 46PH(1B)(b) and s 46PO.

3    In the proceeding, the Applicant (by their litigation representative) seeks declaratory relief and compensation under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) in connection with the alleged unlawful direct and indirect discrimination and unlawful harassment of the Applicant by the Respondent school. The alleged discrimination occurred following an incident between the Applicant and another child, following which the Applicant was withdrawn from the Respondent school.

4    At the first case management hearing on 16 June 2026, at the urging of the Respondent, I made an interim suppression order under s 37AI of the Federal Court Act restricting disclosure of the originating application other than to the parties and their legal representatives: cf, Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), r 2.32(2)(a). That interim order was made pending determination of an application seeking suppression and non-publication orders to be filed on 18 June 2026 and heard on 24 June 2026.

5    The Respondent did not file an interlocutory application. Instead, on 18 June 2026, the parties provided a minute of consent seeking the pseudonym orders to which I have referred. The pseudonym orders are sought on the ground stated in s 37AG(1)(a) of the Federal Court Act – that the orders are necessary to prevent prejudice to the proper administration of justice. In essence, that is said to be so because the proceeding concerns the Applicant’s neurodevelopmental conditions, which are highly personal and sensitive, and allegations about the conduct of other children who are not parties and not witnesses and will not, therefore, be able to answer the allegations made against them.

6    For the reasons that follow, I am satisfied that it is necessary to make pseudonym orders under s 37AF of the Federal Court Act, on the ground stated in s 37AG(1)(a), substantively in the terms sought by the parties. I will, however, include the parents of the Applicant in the anonymisation orders because, in my assessment, the disclosure of their names is likely to enable their child to be identified, which would defeat the purpose of the orders. I will also make the consequential orders sought by the parties.

relevant principles

7    The Court has power under s 37AF(1)(a) of the Federal Court Act to make an order prohibiting or restricting the publication or other disclosure of information tending to reveal the identity of or otherwise concerning any party to or witness in a proceeding, or any person who is related to or otherwise associated with any party to or witness in a proceeding before the Court. The exercise of the power in the present case requires it to be established that the orders sought are necessary to prevent prejudice to the proper administration of justice: Federal Court Act, s 37AF(1) and s 37AG(1)(a).

8    In deciding whether to make such an order, the Court must take into account that a primary objective of the administration of justice is to safeguard the public interest in open justice: Federal Court Act, s 37AE. The Court must also decide the period for which an order is to operate: Federal Court Act, s 37AJ. This requires that the order apply “for a finite duration, in the sense of having an express date upon which it expires, an express or otherwise ascertainable duration for which it applies, or a point in time referable to a particular specified event which can reasonably be expected to occur, such that it can be known, at the time it is made, that the [order] will expire”: Nicolson v Naizmand (duration of non-publication order) [2026] FCA 635 at [46] (Bromwich J).

9    The threshold to be met in obtaining a suppression or non-publication order on the ground stated in s 37AG(1) of the Federal Court Act is high. Such orders can only be made when it is “necessary” to do so and the primary objective of the administration of justice as referred to above, namely, to safeguard the public interest in open justice: EOF25 v Talbot [2025] FCA 1091 at [13] (Wigney J); see also, Swannick v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (No 2) [2021] FCAFC 81 at [13]-[14] (McKerracher, White and Stewart JJ).

10    Mere embarrassment, inconvenience or annoyance will not justify the making of a suppression or non-publication order, and unreasonable or groundless fears will not suffice: Swannick at [14], citing Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cascade Coal Pty Ltd (No 1) [2015] FCA 607; (2015) 331 ALR 68 at [30] (Foster J). Nor should such orders be made merely because it may be convenient to do so or because there is no objection: EOF25 at [15].

11    Once the Court is satisfied that a suppression or non-publication order is necessary, it would be an error not to make it – there is no exercise of any residual discretion or balancing exercise involved: EOF25 at [14].

disposition

12    The pseudonym orders pressed at the hearing (as opposed to those identified in the minute of consent) concern three categories of children: (i) the Applicant; (ii) the child involved in an incident with the Applicant that led to the Applicant’s withdrawal from the Respondent school (other child); and (iii) other children at the Respondent school who do not suffer a disability but engaged in similar behaviour to the Applicant and to whom reference will be necessary in the proceeding as a result of the comparison required by s 5 of the Discrimination Act (comparator children).

13    The parties have not filed any evidence in support of the minute of consent but rely on the material set out in the originating application because it sets out the subject matter of the proceeding, as well as the “comparator requirements” arising at law in relation to the claim of direct discrimination.

14    I am satisfied, for the following reasons, that it is necessary to prevent prejudice to the proper administration of justice to make pseudonym orders prohibiting or restricting the publication or other disclosure of information tending to reveal the identity of each category of child as referred to above.

Applicant

15    First, insofar as it concerns the Applicant, the proceeding will involve information regarding two neurodevelopmental conditions he has and how they manifest in particular situations. The parties submit, and I accept, that information is properly characterised as being of a highly personal and sensitive nature. Given that the Applicant is a minor, it would be inappropriate in that circumstance to allow his name to be published: Smith v A High School [2025] FCA 1432 at [11] (Perram J). To do so may make other potential litigants who are still minors reluctant to access the Court for fear that their identities will be revealed and associated with information of that character. Such a consequence would prejudice the proper administration of justice: A on behalf of B v State of NSW (Department of Education and Training) [2013] FCA 331 at [10] (Griffiths J).

Other child

16    Second, insofar as it concerns the other child, the proceeding will involve information about his conduct as part of the incident that led to the Applicant’s withdrawal from the Respondent school. However, the other child is not a party to the proceeding and will not be called as a witness. That is because the incident, and his conduct during that incident, does not itself found the allegations of discrimination with which the proceeding is concerned. The other child is, therefore, “associated with” the Applicant in the proceeding but left in the position of being unable to defend the allegations made about his conduct: Federal Court Act, s 37AF(1)(a). It would be unfairly prejudicial to the other child and, consequently, the proper administration of justice to permit him being identified in the proceeding but unable to answer the allegations made against him: cf, Ryan v Transurban Limited [2024] FCA 994 at [38] (Rangiah J) and the cases there cited.

Comparator children

17    Third, insofar as it concerns the comparator children, the parties submit, and I accept, that the proceeding will involve evidence with respect to how the Respondent school treated pupils who do not have the Applicant’s neurodevelopmental conditions and have engaged in similar conduct. That is because, for the purpose of applying a law against unjust discrimination, s 5 of the Discrimination Act requires a comparison to be made between the treatment of the Applicant and the treatment of some other pupil or pupils who, without any disability, have engaged in similar conduct: cf, Purvis v New South Wales (Department of Education and Training) [2003] HCA 62; (2003) 217 CLR 92 at [8]-[12] (Gleeson CJ); see also [213]-[232] (Gummow, Hayne and Heydon JJ) and [274] (Callinan J). Those comparator children will be in the same position as the other child in that they will be “associated with” the Applicant in the proceeding but left in the position of not being able to answer the allegations made about their conduct. As such, and for the same reasons given with respect to the other child, I am satisfied that a pseudonym order is necessary for the comparator children: Ryan at [38].

Parents

18    There remains the position with respect to the parents of the children in respect of whom pseudonym orders will be made. With one exception, the parties seek that the names of the parents of the children referenced in the proceeding also be anonymised. Those orders are sought on the basis, which I accept, that identification of a parent will tend to identify the child. The exception is the parents of the Applicant (one of whom is the Applicant’s litigation representative). The Applicant’s parents seek to be excluded from the terms of the suppression order because, in the view of the litigation representative, the proceeding concerns a matter of public interest.

19    The Respondent did not, at least in the joint submissions filed in support of the consent minute, oppose the Applicant’s parents being excluded from the terms of a pseudonym order. That was on the basis that the order is still necessary to protect the other children referred to in the proceeding. That submission has a circular logic. If the Applicant requires a pseudonym order to protect the proper administration of justice, then there is no residual discretion not to make an order that would protect the Applicant’s identity because his parents consider that the proceeding concerns a matter of public interest: cf, EOF25 at [14]. Counsel for the Respondent accepted as much at the hearing today. It follows that, while the Applicant’s parents oppose being included in any orders made under s 37AF of the Federal Court Act, I am not prepared to accede to that submission. I will make pseudonym orders in respect of both the Applicant’s parents.

Consequential orders

20    The parties seek consequential orders to give effect to the pseudonym orders. Those consequential orders render confidential documents filed in the proceeding that do not include the pseudonyms, require those documents to be refiled with the pseudonyms, and otherwise prevent publication of information which directly identifies the persons in respect of whom the pseudonym orders are made. I am satisfied that those orders are necessary because, without them, the orders protecting the identity of the Applicant, the other child, and comparator children from publication or disclosure would be rendered ineffectual: cf, Federal Court Act, s 37AF and s 37AG(1)(a).

21    Finally, consistent with the findings made by Bromwich J in Nicolson, the minute of consent ensures that the orders have a finite duration, by specifying that they will operate until the date final judgment is delivered in the proceeding or the proceeding is otherwise finalised by order of the Court.

conclusion

22    For all of the above reasons, I will make the following orders:

1.    The name of the Respondent be amended to read “Board of Trustees of the Brisbane Grammar School (operating as Brisbane Grammar School)”.

2.    Order 15 of the Orders of Longbottom J dated 16 June 2026 is vacated.

3.    Pursuant to s 37AF of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), on the ground in s 37AG(1)(a) of the Federal Court Act, from the date of these Orders:

(a)    the Applicant be identified in this proceeding, including in all documents filed in the proceeding, by the pseudonym “GTO26”;

(b)    the litigation representative be identified in this proceeding, including in all documents filed in the proceeding, by the pseudonym “GTS26”;

(c)    the father of the Applicant be identified in this proceeding, including in all documents filed in the proceeding, by the pseudonym “GTU26”;

(d)    the child identified in the originating application filed on 4 March 2026 as “Child X” be identified in this proceeding, including in all documents filed in the proceeding, by the pseudonym “GTZ26”;

(e)    any other child identified or referenced in this proceeding as a comparator for the purposes of s 5 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth), including in all documents filed in the proceeding, be identified by the pseudonym “Child” and a corresponding and consecutive “alphabetic reference”, commencing with “Child A”; and

(f)    any parent of a child identified referred to in order 3(e), including in all documents filed in the proceeding, be identified by the pseudonym “Parent” and a corresponding and consecutive “alphabetic reference”, commencing with “Parent A”.

4.    The title of the proceeding is amended to read “GTO26 by their litigation representative GTS26 v Board of Trustees of the Brisbane Grammar School (operating as Brisbane Grammar School)”.

5.    The Orders of Longbottom J dated 16 June 2026, 17 June 2026 and 19 June 2026, be amended to include the pseudonyms referred to in order 3.

6.    The following documents are to be treated as confidential for the purposes of r 2.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), so as to give effect to order 3:

(a)    the originating application and accompanying documents filed on 4 March 2026;

(b)    the Applicant’s interlocutory application and affidavit of GTS26 filed on 4 June 2026;

(c)    the Respondent’s notice of address for service filed on 20 April 2026;

(d)    the Applicant’s Genuine Steps Statement filed on 12 June 2026;

(e)    the parties’ joint submissions in support of agreed proposed short minutes of order, filed on 22 June 2026; and

(f)    any transcripts of the case management hearing on 16 June 2026, and the interlocutory hearing on 24 June 2026, that identify by name, the persons referred to in order 3.

7.    By 4:00 pm AEST on 23 June 2026, the Applicant (by their litigation representative) file:

(a)    an amended originating application and accompanying documents in the form of the originating document filed on 4 March 2026, save that the Applicant’s name and any child and/or parent’s name be replaced, wherever it appears, by the pseudonym stated in order 3; and

(b)    the Applicant’s Genuine Steps Statement in the form of the original document filed on 12 June 2026, save that the title be replaced in accordance with order 4.

8.    By 4:00 pm AEST on 23 June 2026, the Respondent file:

(a)    the Respondent’s notice of address for service in the form of the original document filed on 20 April 2026, save that the title be replaced in accordance with order 4; and

(b)    the parties’ joint submissions in support of agreed proposed short minutes of order in the form filed on 22 June 2026, save that the title be replaced in accordance with order 4 and the litigation representative’s name be replaced, wherever it appears, by the pseudonym stated in order 3.

9.    Pursuant to s 37AF of the Federal Court Act, on the ground in s 37AG(1)(a) of the Federal Court Act, it is prohibited to publish or disclose information which directly identifies the persons referred to in order 3.

10.    Order 9 does not prohibit publication or disclosure of any information if the publication or disclosure is made:

(a)    by the parties or their legal representatives or any officer or employee of the Court for purposes connected with, or relating to, the proper conduct of this proceeding; or

(b)    with the consent of the parties or with the leave of the Court.

11.    Orders 3, 6 and 9 will operate up to the date that final judgment is delivered in the proceeding, or the proceeding is otherwise finalised by Court order.

Associate:

Dated:    24 June 2026