04 May 2017

Fraud: Tilley v. R.

In refusing name suppression for Victoria Anne Tilley following conviction for work-related fraud, the High Court pointed out name suppression is not the same as a discharge without conviction.  A conviction with name suppression still sits on the criminal record and must be disclosed should future employers ask about an applicant’s criminal history.
Tilley was convicted in March 2017 of fraud committed over a two year period while working as office manager for a Canterbury building company.  She was sentenced to six months’ community detention, 250 hours community work and ordered to pay reparation of $20,000.  She sought permanent name suppression, saying publicity would affect her mental health with an increased risk of self-harm.
Justice Gendall said name publication is the norm.  Employers have the right to be aware of applicants’ criminal history.  Where name suppression is sought on the grounds of potential self-harm, courts take into account ways of managing the risk.  Tilley has a highly-supportive de facto partner together with multiple agencies and medical professionals looking after her, he said.    
Tilley v. R. – High Court (4.05.17)

17.039