Gair and Turland v Greenwood [2020] NSWDC 586

Gair and Turland v Greenwood [2020] NSWDC 586

The defendant published seriously defamatory material imputing corruption, racketeering, and dishonesty to the plaintiffs, which caused substantial embarrassment, distress, and reputational harm. The allegations were known by the defendant to be untrue, and his campaign to repeat the imputations, including via continued online and in-person conduct, aggravated the harm. Damages including aggravated damages were found appropriate, and permanent injunctive relief granted due to the real risk of repetition and inadequacy of damages alone as remedy.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Thomas Duncan Gair; Second Plaintiff: Garry Maurice Turland; Defendant: Adam Haig Greenwood
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment With Orders
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiffs with damages, permanent injunction, and indemnity costs ordered.
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Permanent Injunction, Damage to Reputation, Injury to Feelings, Vindication, Aggravated Damages
Defamation Assessment of Damages Permanent Injunction Damage to Reputation Injury to Feelings Vindication Aggravated Damages

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 10 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Duncan Gair

First Plaintiff

Garry Maurice Turland

Second Plaintiff

Adam Haig Greenwood

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment With Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the published video and continued conduct by the defendant constituted defamatory material against the plaintiffs
  2. 2 Assessment of damages for defamation including aggravated damages
  3. 3 Whether a permanent injunction should be granted to restrain further publication of defamatory material

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant published seriously defamatory material imputing corruption, racketeering, and dishonesty to the plaintiffs, which caused substantial embarrassment, distress, and reputational harm. The allegations were known by the defendant to be untrue, and his campaign to repeat the imputations, including via continued online and in-person conduct, aggravated the harm. Damages including aggravated damages were found appropriate, and permanent injunctive relief granted due to the real risk of repetition and inadequacy of damages alone as remedy.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiffs with damages, permanent injunction, and indemnity costs ordered.

Orders

  • Verdict and judgment for the first plaintiff in the sum of $107,980.
  • Verdict and judgment for the second plaintiff in the sum of $129,468.