Harris v Perkins & Ors [2003] NSWSC 886

The plaintiff's claim in the third further amended statement of claim against the Waterhouses is not an abuse of process and it is open for him to maintain it; accordingly, the application to strike out is dismissed.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 02 October 2003
Procedural Posture: Defamation Claim / Application to Strike Out Statement of Claim
Outcome: application dismissed
Legal Topics: ['strike Out Application' 'abuse of Process' 'joint Authorship' 'republication of Defamatory Material']

['defamation'] ['strike Out Application' 'abuse of Process' 'joint Authorship' 'republication of Defamatory Material']

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

Procedural Posture

Defamation Claim / Application to Strike Out Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the plaintiff is precluded from claiming against the Waterhouses for publication or republication of defamatory material' 'Whether the third further amended statement of claim should be struck out as an abuse of process']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

['The application that the third further amended statement of claim be dismissed or permanently stayed pursuant to Pt 13 r5 and/or Pt 15 r26 of the Supreme Court Rules is dismissed.']