Saunders v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCA 404

Saunders v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCA 404

Leave to appeal was refused because it was open to the jury to find that ordinary decent members of the community would not think less of the plaintiff, a seven year old child, for the imputation that he committed the crime of petrol sniffing. Given his immaturity and circumstances, the jury's verdict that the imputation was not defamatory was not shown to be unreasonable, much less clear and beyond argument.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal From Supreme Court Judgment After Jury Findings Under S 7 a of the Defamation Act 1974
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; plaintiff to pay the costs of the application.
Legal Topics
['defamatory Meaning' 'imputations' 'jury Verdict Unreasonable' 'leave to Appeal' 'child Alleged to Have Committed a Crime']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure' 'appellate Procedure'] ['defamatory Meaning' 'imputations' 'jury Verdict Unreasonable' 'leave to Appeal' 'child Alleged to Have Committed a Crime']

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 / Application for Leave to Appeal From Supreme Court Judgment After Jury Findings Under S 7 a of the Defamation Act 1974

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the jury's finding that the imputation that the plaintiff committed the crime of petrol sniffing was not defamatory was unreasonable." 'Whether the plaintiff was entitled to a verdict in his favour on the first imputation as a matter of law under Supreme Court Act 1970, s 108(3).' 'Whether an allegation that a seven year old child committed the crime of petrol sniffing necessarily made ordinary decent members of the community think less of him.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because it was open to the jury to find that ordinary decent members of the community would not think less of the plaintiff, a seven year old child, for the imputation that he committed the crime of petrol sniffing. Given his immaturity and circumstances, the jury's verdict that the imputation was not defamatory was not shown to be unreasonable, much less clear and beyond argument.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; plaintiff to pay the costs of the application.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal refused.' 'Plaintiff to pay the costs of the application.']