Keating v Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited [No 2] [2001] NSWSC 106

Keating v Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited [No 2] [2001] NSWSC 106

The article, given its sensational presentation, repeated references to sexual harassment claims against the plaintiff, implications of politically motivated delay, and editorial content, is capable of conveying imputations of guilt, and the majority of the pleaded imputations (except for one) were sufficiently differentiated and can be reformulated and put to the jury. One imputation failed as it did not differ in substance from another. The defendant is ordered to pay 75% of the plaintiff's costs.

Parties
Plaintiff: Anthony Keating; Defendant: Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Interlocutory Application Regarding Form and Substance of Pleaded Imputations
Outcome
Majority of pleaded imputations to go to the jury, one imputation struck out, liberty to re-plead for form, costs partially awarded to plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Imputations of Guilt, Pleading Requirements, Liberty to Re Plead, Differences in Substance of Imputations
Defamation Imputations of Guilt Pleading Requirements Liberty to Re Plead Differences in Substance of Imputations

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Keating

Plaintiff

Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Interlocutory Application Regarding Form and Substance of Pleaded Imputations

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the publication is capable of conveying imputations of guilt against the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether pleaded imputations are bad in form or insufficiently precise
  3. 3 Whether certain imputations differ in substance

Ratio Decidendi

The article, given its sensational presentation, repeated references to sexual harassment claims against the plaintiff, implications of politically motivated delay, and editorial content, is capable of conveying imputations of guilt, and the majority of the pleaded imputations (except for one) were sufficiently differentiated and can be reformulated and put to the jury. One imputation failed as it did not differ in substance from another. The defendant is ordered to pay 75% of the plaintiff's costs.

Court Disposition

Majority of pleaded imputations to go to the jury, one imputation struck out, liberty to re-plead for form, costs partially awarded to plaintiff.

Orders

  • Imputations (a), (e) and (g) to go to the jury.
  • Imputations (b), (c), (d) and (h) to go to the jury, with liberty to the plaintiff to re-plead in approved form.