DIX GARDNER PTY LTD & ANOR v STRATHFIELD MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ORS [2003] NSWSC 597

DIX GARDNER PTY LTD & ANOR v STRATHFIELD MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ORS [2003] NSWSC 597

The proposed amended pleading was permitted only in accordance with the Court's rulings: imputations capable of being carried and not defective in form were allowed to go to the jury; imputations bad in form, imprecise, incapable of being defamatory, or not different in substance were struck out or required an election. The plaintiffs were also required to provide proper particulars of identification and republication where necessary. The matter was directed to proceed to a s7A trial by jury.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Rulings on Proposed Further Amended Statement of Claim After SCR Pr 67 R 12 a Notices and Directions for S7 a Trial by Jury
Outcome
Leave granted to file a further amended statement of claim in accordance with the rulings; trial by jury ordered; each party to pay its own costs.
Legal Topics
['defamatory Imputations' 'capacity' 'form of Imputations' 'difference in Substance' 'identification' 'republication' 'particulars' 'trial by Jury']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['defamatory Imputations' 'capacity' 'form of Imputations' 'difference in Substance' 'identification' 'republication' 'particulars' 'trial by Jury']

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 Proceedings / Rulings on Proposed Further Amended Statement of Claim After SCR Pr 67 R 12 a Notices and Directions for S7 a Trial by Jury

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed imputations in relation to the media release were capable of being carried, defamatory and proper in form.' 'Whether some proposed imputations did not differ in substance, requiring election.' 'Whether the second plaintiff had properly particularised identification in respect of the media release.' 'Whether the first and second defendants could be liable for publication by the third defendant absent proper particulars of aiding and abetting.' 'Whether the proposed imputations in relation to the Today Tonight programme were capable of being carried, defamatory and proper in form.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed amended pleading was permitted only in accordance with the Court's rulings: imputations capable of being carried and not defective in form were allowed to go to the jury; imputations bad in form, imprecise, incapable of being defamatory, or not different in substance were struck out or required an election. The plaintiffs were also required to provide proper particulars of identification and republication where necessary. The matter was directed to proceed to a s7A trial by jury.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to file a further amended statement of claim in accordance with the rulings; trial by jury ordered; each party to pay its own costs.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiffs have leave to file a further amended statement of claim in accordance with the rulings herein within 14 days.' 'Within 14 days thereafter the defendants are to file their respective defences for the purposes of the s7A trial by jury.' 'Pursuant to SCR Pt 31 r 2 I order the trial by jury of the...