Cornish v Australian Broadcasting Corporation [2014] NSWSC 1936

Cornish v Australian Broadcasting Corporation [2014] NSWSC 1936

The programme specifically identified the plaintiffs and the conduct impugned to them, and its overall tenor criticised the police investigation. The juxtaposition of the plaintiffs allowing Rhys Colefax to use Constable Hevers' mobile phone to call his father with the statement about what should have been done was reasonably capable of conveying imputations (b), (c), (d), and, although barely, (e). Imputations (c) and (d) should be relied on as alternatives, and the concluding phrase of imputation (e), "without subsequently disclosing the contents of that telephone conversation", should be struck out as surplusage. The plaintiffs were therefore granted leave to file an Amended Statement...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings Arising Out of the Broadcast of a Story on the Four Corners Programme on ABC Television / Procedural Ruling on the Defendant's Objections to the Plaintiffs' Imputations and Leave to File an Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Leave granted to file an Amended Statement of Claim in accordance with the rulings; defendant ordered to pay the plaintiffs' costs of the application.
Legal Topics
['pleadings' 'defamatory Imputations' 'capacity to Convey Imputations' 'amended Statement of Claim' 'costs']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['pleadings' 'defamatory Imputations' 'capacity to Convey Imputations' 'amended Statement of Claim' 'costs']

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 Proceedings Arising Out of the Broadcast of a Story on the Four Corners Programme on ABC Television / Procedural Ruling on the Defendant's Objections to the Plaintiffs' Imputations and Leave to File an Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the matter complained of was reasonably capable of conveying the plaintiffs' imputations concerning breach of duty, favourable treatment, failure to refer the investigation to independent police officers, incompetence, and compromising a police investigation." 'Whether imputation (e) should be amended by striking out the concluding phrase as surplusage.' 'Whether the plaintiffs should have leave to file an Amended Statement of Claim in accordance with the rulings.']

Ratio Decidendi

The programme specifically identified the plaintiffs and the conduct impugned to them, and its overall tenor criticised the police investigation. The juxtaposition of the plaintiffs allowing Rhys Colefax to use Constable Hevers' mobile phone to call his father with the statement about what should have been done was reasonably capable of conveying imputations (b), (c), (d), and, although barely, (e). Imputations (c) and (d) should be relied on as alternatives, and the concluding phrase of imputation (e), "without subsequently disclosing the contents of that telephone conversation", should be struck out as surplusage. The plaintiffs were therefore granted leave to file an Amended Statement...

Court Disposition

Leave granted to file an Amended Statement of Claim in accordance with the rulings; defendant ordered to pay the plaintiffs' costs of the application.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiffs should have leave to file an Amended Statement of Claim in accordance with these rulings.' 'The concluding phrase of imputation (e), "without subsequently disclosing the contents of that telephone conversation", should be struck out as surplusage.' "The defendant is to pay the plaintiffs' costs of...