Jones v John Fairfax Publications Pty Limited & Anor [1999] NSWSC 892

Jones v John Fairfax Publications Pty Limited & Anor [1999] NSWSC 892

Imputation (a) is properly structured, captures the relevant sting of dishonesty, and is capable of being carried by the matter complained of and being defamatory. Imputation (b) is defective in form due to uncertain meaning and is struck out, but plaintiff is given leave to re-plead.

Parties
Plaintiff: Alan Jones; First Defendant: John Fairfax Publications Pty Limited; Second Defendant: David Leser
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 September 1999
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Application Regarding Form and Capacity of Imputations
Outcome
Imputation (a) proceeds to jury; imputation (b) struck out with leave to re-plead; directions for parties regarding re-pleading; each party pays its own costs; further directions scheduled.
Legal Topics
Imputations, Form of Imputation, Capacity, Difference in Substance
Defamation Imputations Form of Imputation Capacity Difference in Substance

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Jones

Plaintiff

John Fairfax Publications Pty Limited

First Defendant

David Leser

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Application Regarding Form and Capacity of Imputations

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether imputation (a) is proper in form and capable of being defamatory
  2. 2 Whether imputation (b) is defective in form and incapable of being defamatory
  3. 3 Whether leave should be given to re-plead imputation (b)

Ratio Decidendi

Imputation (a) is properly structured, captures the relevant sting of dishonesty, and is capable of being carried by the matter complained of and being defamatory. Imputation (b) is defective in form due to uncertain meaning and is struck out, but plaintiff is given leave to re-plead.

Court Disposition

Imputation (a) proceeds to jury; imputation (b) struck out with leave to re-plead; directions for parties regarding re-pleading; each party pays its own costs; further directions scheduled.

Orders

  • Imputation (a) will go to the jury.
  • Imputation (b) is struck out with leave to re-plead.