Journalists, media face trials over suppression order of George Pell’s conviction

Journalists and media groups could face 13 separate trials over alleged reporting on the Cardinal.

Cardinal George Pell, who was acquitted of child sex abuse charges earlier this year.

Journalists and media organisations could face more than a dozen separate trials over contempt charges for alleged reporting on Cardinal George Pell’s conviction, with the first trial tentatively scheduled for November.

Cardinal Pell was convicted by a jury in the Victorian County Court in December 2018 of child sexual abuse charges while the subject of a suppression order.

Cardinal Pell was acquitted by the High Court earlier this year.

The suppression orders were in place because of a pending second trial which did not proceed, allowing the outcome to be reported in February 2019.

But a number of media outlets allegedly published stories referring to the case by including information about the conviction of a high-profile Australian and referenced court orders.

Victoria's Director of Public Prosecutions Kerri Judd QC has charged 11 corporations and 19 individuals with contempt over the publications.

Charges have already been dropped against five individuals and one media outlet.

Barrister Lisa De Ferrari SC, acting for the DPP, told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that there were still various issues including the media organisations not giving notice of the evidence they intended to call until the close of the prosecution case or its witnesses.

Barrister Matt Collins QC, who is representing all 30 accused, said 19 individuals had been charged and 11 corporations with six corporate groups and it was likely multiple trials would be sought.

"At present it appears to us there are 13 separate controversies and on the face of it, it would to an injustice to have journalists for rival news organisations to face trial at the same time," Dr Collins said.

All would be heard by a judge alone.

Dr Collins said his clients were anxious for the case to be resolved.

"They've had these matters hanging over their heads for far too long," he said.

Justice John Dixon agreed the case, which has been going for more than a year, was dragging on too long.

He noted it seemed the parties hadn't agreed to any facts in the case, noting the prosecution argument that Cardinal Pell was a high-profile Australian hadn't been accepted by the defence.

But Dr Collins said while that seemed an uncontroversial statement, the status of Cardinal Pell's profile in Darwin, Perth or anywhere else outside Victoria was irrelevant to the case.

He said given the serious contempt charges being faced, they couldn't admit such a bold allegation.

But Ms De Ferrari said the suppression orders over the case applied Australia-wide, so it was relevant.

If convicted, organisations face significant fines while individuals face up to five years in prison.

Dr Collins previously described the charges as "serious as it gets" said guilty findings could have a "chilling effect" on open justice.

Justice Dixon listed November 9 for the first trial, but flagged the possibility it could happen sooner.

"I've got a holiday booked in Spain in September – so I'll be around," he joked.

"We'll just have to juggle this and see how we go, but let's keep it moving forward."

Additional reporting AAP