King v Linney (No 2) [2010] NSWSC 342

King v Linney (No 2) [2010] NSWSC 342

Paragraph 4 of the statement of claim was wholly bad in form and could not stand because it pleaded each matter complained of as conveying each imputation in an omnibus fashion, there was no way to know what part of which publication was said to give rise to each imputation, some publications were incapable of conveying the pleaded imputations, the pleading required a strained chain of inference, and the plaintiffs had failed to comply with UCPR 15.19. The plaintiffs were also required to answer outstanding requests for particulars. No costs were ordered on the notice to produce issue because the defendants' objection, although technically correct, caused unnecessary costs where no...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceeding / Interlocutory Applications to Strike Out Pleading, for Particulars, for Costs, Concerning Notice to Produce, Challenge to Solicitor's Retainer, and Reserved Costs
Outcome
Paragraph 4 of the statement of claim struck out with liberty to amend; plaintiffs ordered to provide outstanding particulars; plaintiffs ordered to pay defendants' costs on the strike out, particulars and retainer issues; defendants' costs application on the notice to produce issue dismissed; plaintiffs'...
Legal Topics
['capacity of Pleaded Imputations to Arise From Matters Complained Of' 'particulars in Defamation Pleadings' 'strike Out Under UCPR 14.28' 'notice to Produce' 'overriding Purpose Under Civil Procedure Act 2005 S 56' "challenge to Solicitor's Retainer for Alleged Conflict of Interest" 'reserved Costs']
['practice and Procedure' 'defamation' 'costs' 'legal Practitioners'] ['capacity of Pleaded Imputations to Arise From Matters Complained Of' 'particulars in Defamation Pleadings' 'strike Out Under UCPR 14.28' 'notice to Produce' 'overriding Purpose Under Civil Procedure Act 2005 S 56' "challenge to Solicitor's Retainer for Alleged Conflict of Interest" 'reserved Costs']

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 Proceeding / Interlocutory Applications to Strike Out Pleading, for Particulars, for Costs, Concerning Notice to Produce, Challenge to Solicitor's Retainer, and Reserved Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether paragraph 4 of the statement of claim should be struck out because the pleaded imputations were not capable of arising from the matters complained of and because of non-compliance with UCPR 15.19.' 'Whether the plaintiffs should provide further particulars requested by the defendants.' 'Whether the defendants should receive costs in relation to a notice to produce served on their solicitor personally rather than on the defendants.' "Whether the plaintiffs should pay the defendants' costs of resisting the plaintiffs' abandoned challenge to the defendants' solicitor's retainer." 'Whether reserved costs from earlier directions hearings should be adjudicated at this stage.']

Ratio Decidendi

Paragraph 4 of the statement of claim was wholly bad in form and could not stand because it pleaded each matter complained of as conveying each imputation in an omnibus fashion, there was no way to know what part of which publication was said to give rise to each imputation, some publications were incapable of conveying the pleaded imputations, the pleading required a strained chain of inference, and the plaintiffs had failed to comply with UCPR 15.19. The plaintiffs were also required to answer outstanding requests for particulars. No costs were ordered on the notice to produce issue because the defendants' objection, although technically correct, caused unnecessary costs where no...

Court Disposition

Paragraph 4 of the statement of claim struck out with liberty to amend; plaintiffs ordered to provide outstanding particulars; plaintiffs ordered to pay defendants' costs on the strike out, particulars and retainer issues; defendants' costs application on the notice to produce issue dismissed; plaintiffs'...

Orders

  • ['Order that paragraph 4 of the statement of claim be struck out.' 'Grant liberty to the plaintiffs within 28 days to file and serve an amended statement of claim if so advised.' "Order the plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs of and incidental to the application to strike out paragraph 4 of the statement of...