NRMA v Snodgrass [2002] NSWSC 811

NRMA v Snodgrass [2002] NSWSC 811

The statement was defamatory within the meaning of section 249P(9)(a) because an ordinary reader could conclude that a person carrying out NRMA functions had improperly advanced his own interests and would likely conclude that particular directors had engaged in a cover up, conduct that would breach directors' duties. Because a defamatory statement under section 249P(9)(a) need not be distributed, and the statement had to stand or fall as a whole, the NRMA was not required to distribute it to its members.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 August 2002
Procedural Posture
Corporations Proceedings Seeking Declarations Concerning Circulation of a Members' Statement Under Section 249 P of the Corporations Act 2001 / Urgent Final Hearing; Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Declarations and orders made for the NRMA; Mr Snodgrass ordered to pay costs.
Legal Topics
["company Obligation to Circulate Members' Statement" 'defamatory Statements Under Section 249 P(9)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001' "severance of Non Defamatory Parts of a Members' Statement" 'non Publication Order' 'costs']
['corporations' 'statutory Interpretation' 'defamation'] ["company Obligation to Circulate Members' Statement" 'defamatory Statements Under Section 249 P(9)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001' "severance of Non Defamatory Parts of a Members' Statement" 'non Publication Order' '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

Corporations Proceedings Seeking Declarations Concerning Circulation of a Members' Statement Under Section 249 P of the Corporations Act 2001 / Urgent Final Hearing; Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the members' statement supplied by William Snodgrass was defamatory within the meaning of section 249P(9)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001." 'Whether, if part of the statement was defamatory, the company or Court could sever non-defamatory parts and require circulation of the remainder.' "Whether the National Roads and Motorists' Association Limited was required to distribute the statement to its members."]

Ratio Decidendi

The statement was defamatory within the meaning of section 249P(9)(a) because an ordinary reader could conclude that a person carrying out NRMA functions had improperly advanced his own interests and would likely conclude that particular directors had engaged in a cover up, conduct that would breach directors' duties. Because a defamatory statement under section 249P(9)(a) need not be distributed, and the statement had to stand or fall as a whole, the NRMA was not required to distribute it to its members.

Court Disposition

Declarations and orders made for the NRMA; Mr Snodgrass ordered to pay costs.

Orders

  • ['Declared that the document annexed to the cross-claim and marked A is defamatory within the meaning of section 249P(9)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).' 'Declared that the cross-claimant is not required to distribute that document to its members or to any of them.' 'Ordered that the contents of the document...