Court records in search
Court and tribunal records showing for your name
Court lists, judgments, tribunal decisions and reports of your case on page one, sometimes years after the matter ended. Most of it stays public, but what people see when they search your name can change. Free assessment within one business day. Confidential, no obligation.
Get Free Proposal5,436+
Australians helped
24h
Free assessment
No
Obligation
The short answer
Can court records be removed from search results in Australia?
Usually not at the source. Australian courts work under open justice, so court lists and published decisions stay public, and fair reports of court proceedings are generally protected. What can change is visibility: a result can be refreshed once its source page changes, a report can be updated when charges are withdrawn or dismissed, and suppression can move the rest off page one.
What this looks like
What kinds of court content show up for a name?
Most people who contact us have more than one of these results, and each has its own pathway.
News reports of a court appearance
Articles about a charge, a hearing or a sentence, often still ranking after the charges were dropped, dismissed or ended without a conviction.
Court lists and hearing dates
Listing pages that show your name next to a court, a date and a matter type, and the copies other sites make of them.
Published judgments
Written reasons published by a court and republished by legal databases, ranking for your full name.
Tribunal decisions
Decisions from civil, administrative and consumer tribunals, including building, tenancy and workplace disputes.
Professional disciplinary decisions
Disciplinary findings and regulator register entries for doctors, lawyers and other registered professionals.
Republished and scraped copies
Aggregator and commentary sites that copy court material, sometimes out of date or out of context.
The legal background
Why does court content stay public?
Australian courts operate on the principle of open justice. In New South Wales, the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 tells courts that safeguarding the public interest in open justice is a primary objective when they consider a suppression order. In Victoria, the Open Courts Act 2013 sets a presumption in favour of disclosure. Other states and territories have their own rules. Suppression and non-publication orders are made by the court in limited circumstances, and whether one could apply is a question for your lawyer.
Reporting of court cases is generally lawful too. The uniform defamation laws, for example section 29 of Queensland's Defamation Act 2005, give a defence for a fair report of proceedings of public concern, which include public court hearings. Published decisions are also collected by free legal databases such as AustLII, so the same decision can rank from more than one site.
That is why the realistic work is mostly about visibility, not deletion, which is what search suppression changes. The exceptions are worth chasing: pages that are wrong, pages that are out of date, and copies on sites that have their own rules.
Pathways by content type
Which pathway fits each type of court content?
Who controls a page decides what can change. Most matters need more than one row.
| Type of content | Who controls it | Can the source change? | Realistic pathway |
|---|---|---|---|
| News report of a court appearance | The publisher | Sometimes, for example an update noting charges were withdrawn or dismissed | Update request to the publisher made by you or your lawyer, plus suppression on searches for your name |
| Court list or hearing-date page | The court, or the site that copied it | The court decides what its own lists show. Copies elsewhere vary | Refresh the search result once the page has changed or gone, and raise copies with the site or host where grounds exist |
| Published judgment | The court and the legal databases that republish it | Rarely. Any change is a matter for the court | Suppression, with any question about the decision itself raised by your lawyer |
| Tribunal decision | The tribunal and the databases that republish it | Rarely. Any change is a matter for the tribunal | Suppression, with any question about the decision itself raised by your lawyer |
| Professional disciplinary decision or register entry | The tribunal or the regulator | Only through the regulator's own processes | Ask the regulator about its process, and build suppression for the decision and any coverage of it |
| Republished or scraped copy | The third-party site | Sometimes, where it is inaccurate, out of date or breaches the site's rules | Removal request to the site, host or search engine where grounds exist, then suppression for what stays |
Where to start
What should you do first?
These steps hold whether you act alone, through a lawyer, or with us, and the first two cost nothing.
Record every result
Search your name the way others would, with and without your suburb or profession. Save every URL and a screenshot of what page one shows.
Get proof of the outcome
The court document showing the charge was withdrawn, dismissed or ended without a conviction. Every update request rests on it.
Ask for updates and refreshes
Ask the source to update what is wrong or out of date. Once a page changes, use Google's refresh outdated content tool so the result catches up.
Build suppression
For what lawfully stays, build accurate pages under your name until the court content moves off page one. Then keep monitoring.
Google describes the refresh tool on its Search help page. It updates the search result only, and only after the source page has changed or been removed.
Outcomes and records
Do dropped charges or spent convictions change what is online?
Dropped charges give you the strongest footing. A report of a charge can be accurate on the day it ran and misleading years later, which is why an update request carries weight when the outcome is documented. Our guide to charges dropped but the article still online walks through it, and the news content service covers the search side when the result is a news report.
Spent convictions work differently. Under the Commonwealth scheme in Part VIIC of the Crimes Act 1914, the OAIC explains that a person can leave certain less serious convictions undisclosed once a waiting period has passed, generally 10 years, or 5 years for a juvenile offender, and that the scheme limits disclosure of them. Each state and territory has its own scheme with its own rules. Ask a lawyer whether a scheme bears on a particular web page before relying on it.
For registered health practitioners, Ahpra explains how outcomes such as reprimands, conditions and undertakings appear on its public register and how they are reviewed. Other professions have their own regulators and processes.
Rules differ between the Commonwealth, the states and the territories. This page is general information, not legal advice. Speak to a lawyer about your own matter.
Popular questions
Common questions about court records
If your question isn't here, ask us during the free assessment.
Can a court record be removed from Google?
Usually not at the source. Courts publish lists and decisions under the principle of open justice, and the court decides what stays on its own site. What can change is the search result. If a page has changed or been taken down, Google's refresh outdated content tool can be used to update the result. Copies on other sites can be raised with the site or host where there are grounds. Whatever lawfully stays online can be moved down page one with suppression.
My charges were dropped but my court appearance still shows. What can I do?
Get the document that records the outcome first, because every request rests on it. A report of the charge may have been accurate on the day it was published, so the usual ask is an update noting the charge was withdrawn or dismissed, made to the publisher by you or your lawyer. Once a page changes, the search result can be refreshed. We build suppression on searches for your name alongside, so the outcome is not left to one publisher's decision.
Can a published judgment or tribunal decision be taken down or anonymised?
That is a decision for the court or tribunal that published it, and your lawyer is the right person to raise it. Expect a published decision to stay up. Legal databases such as AustLII also republish decisions. The workable search-side step is suppression: building accurate, current pages under your name so the decision no longer defines page one.
Is a news report of my court case defamatory?
A fair report of court proceedings is generally protected. The uniform defamation laws include a defence for fair reports of proceedings of public concern, and those proceedings include public court hearings. A report that gets the facts wrong is a different matter, and a lawyer can tell you whether it crosses the line. This is general information, not legal advice.
What is a spent conviction, and does it change what is online?
Spent conviction schemes let a person leave certain older, less serious convictions undisclosed after a waiting period, and limit who can disclose them. The Commonwealth scheme sits in Part VIIC of the Crimes Act 1914, and each state and territory has its own scheme with its own rules. Ask a lawyer whether a scheme bears on a particular web page before you rely on it.
Do you contact the court or the news outlet for me?
No. Requests to a court or a news outlet are made by you or your lawyer. We run the search side: removal requests to platforms, hosts and search engines where grounds exist, refresh requests once a source page has changed, and suppression for what lawfully stays. We coordinate with your lawyer where there is a legal side to the matter.
Related reading: an old news article still ranking for your name, reputation management for lawyers, search results for your business name, or the search content support service.
Last updated
Find out what can change in your results
Free, confidential, no obligation. Most assessments back within one business day, with each result mapped to its realistic pathway.
Get Free ProposalOutcomes depend on the specific content, applicable jurisdiction, available evidence, and platform or search conditions.