Nikolopoulos & 10 Ors v Greek Herald Pty Limited & AnorSkalkos v Nikolopoulos & 10 Ors [2000] NSWSC 617

Nikolopoulos & 10 Ors v Greek Herald Pty Limited & AnorSkalkos v Nikolopoulos & 10 Ors [2000] NSWSC 617

The particulars of publication and identification provided in the cross-claim were found to be inadequate, being too general and lacking necessary factual specificity as to each cross-defendant. Certain imputations in the cross-claim were incapable of being carried by the matters complained of as a matter of law, while others were capable and could proceed to be determined by a jury.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Defamation Cross Claim (particulars and Capacity of Pleadings) / Interlocutory Application for Particulars and Strike Out of Imputations
Outcome
Application substantially allowed; particulars struck out in part; certain imputations struck out for lack of capacity; others to proceed; cross-claimant given leave to re-plead; costs to cross-defendants.
Legal Topics
['particulars of Publication' 'identification in Defamation' 'imputations Capacity' 'pleadings Sufficiency']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['particulars of Publication' 'identification in Defamation' 'imputations Capacity' 'pleadings Sufficiency']

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 Cross Claim (particulars and Capacity of Pleadings) / Interlocutory Application for Particulars and Strike Out of Imputations

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether particulars of publication and identification supplied by the cross-claimant are adequate' 'Whether alleged imputations are capable of being carried by the publications complained of']

Ratio Decidendi

The particulars of publication and identification provided in the cross-claim were found to be inadequate, being too general and lacking necessary factual specificity as to each cross-defendant. Certain imputations in the cross-claim were incapable of being carried by the matters complained of as a matter of law, while others were capable and could proceed to be determined by a jury.

Court Disposition

Application substantially allowed; particulars struck out in part; certain imputations struck out for lack of capacity; others to proceed; cross-claimant given leave to re-plead; costs to cross-defendants.

Orders

  • ['Particulars of publication 4(a)-(d) and 8(a)-(d) struck out.' 'Particulars of identification 5(b), 5(c), 9(b), and 9(c) struck out.' 'Cross-claimant to re-particularise facts and matters as to both publication and identification in accordance with the reasons.' 'Imputations 6(a), (b), (c) in the Cross Claim...