Purcell & Anor v Cruising Yacht Club of Australia & 2 Ors [2001] NSWSC 927

Purcell & Anor v Cruising Yacht Club of Australia & 2 Ors [2001] NSWSC 927

The tendered documents were relevant under s 55(1) of the Evidence Act because they went to the decision to hold the press conference, discussions about it, and the allocation of speaking roles, which could form a step in proving the third defendant acted in concert and was a co-publisher. Their admission did not determine the ultimate question whether the third defendant was liable as a co-publisher; that would depend also on what occurred at the press conference as shown by Exhibit A.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Ruling on Admissibility of Documents During Trial
Outcome
Documents admitted over objection.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Documents' 'publication' 'co Publisher Liability' 'relevance Under S 55(1) of the Evidence Act']
['defamation' 'evidence'] ['admissibility of Documents' 'publication' 'co Publisher Liability' 'relevance Under S 55(1) of the Evidence Act']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Ruling on Admissibility of Documents During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the minutes, news notification, running sheet and interrogatories were admissible as relevant evidence.' 'Whether the documents could go to proof that the third defendant acted in concert and was a co-publisher of defamatory matter at the press conference.']

Ratio Decidendi

The tendered documents were relevant under s 55(1) of the Evidence Act because they went to the decision to hold the press conference, discussions about it, and the allocation of speaking roles, which could form a step in proving the third defendant acted in concert and was a co-publisher. Their admission did not determine the ultimate question whether the third defendant was liable as a co-publisher; that would depend also on what occurred at the press conference as shown by Exhibit A.

Court Disposition

Documents admitted over objection.

Orders

  • ["Upon tender by Mr Tobin in the presence of the jury, the defendants' objection will be noted and the documents will be admitted as exhibits."]