Castafiore v Uniting Church in Australia Property Trust (NSW) [2018] NSWDC 83
The plaintiff did not satisfy the high s 56A test for extending time for the first six publications. Although she had sympathy-evoking personal circumstances and there may have been delay in provision of documents, she knew by May 2017 of the first document and of further similar publications and did not take the steps identified by authority as necessary before expiry of the limitation period. Lack of knowledge of defamation law, personal upheaval, and requests under freedom of information processes were insufficient. The existing Statement of Claim was so defective that it had to be struck out, but the plaintiff remained within time for the publications dated 24 February 2017 and 20...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 05 April 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Defamation Proceedings / Interlocutory Applications for Extension of Limitation Period, Summary Dismissal/strike Out of Pleadings, and Suppression/non Publication Orders
- Outcome
- Suppression and non-publication orders made; plaintiff's application to extend time dismissed for the first six publications; Statement of Claim struck out with leave to commence defamation proceedings in relation to two later documents; plaintiff referred for pro bono assistance; matter stood over for further...
- Legal Topics
- ['extension of Time for Defamation Proceedings Under Limitation Act 1969 (nsw) Ss 14 B and 56 A' 'meaning of "not Reasonable" to Commence Proceedings Within the Limitation Period' 'strike Out of Deficient Pleadings' 'pro Bono Referral for Pleading Assistance' 'suppression of Identities of Children and Parties']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation Proceedings / Interlocutory Applications for Extension of Limitation Period, Summary Dismissal/strike Out of Pleadings, and Suppression/non Publication Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should be granted an extension of time under s 56A of the Limitation Act 1969 (NSW) for six publications predating 10 January 2017.' "Whether the plaintiff's Statement of Claim should be struck out for pleading defects." 'Whether leave should be granted to plead defamation claims concerning publications dated 24 February 2017 and 20 June 2017.' 'Whether suppression and non-publication orders should be made to protect the identities of children and related persons.']
Ratio Decidendi
The plaintiff did not satisfy the high s 56A test for extending time for the first six publications. Although she had sympathy-evoking personal circumstances and there may have been delay in provision of documents, she knew by May 2017 of the first document and of further similar publications and did not take the steps identified by authority as necessary before expiry of the limitation period. Lack of knowledge of defamation law, personal upheaval, and requests under freedom of information processes were insufficient. The existing Statement of Claim was so defective that it had to be struck out, but the plaintiff remained within time for the publications dated 24 February 2017 and 20...
Court Disposition
Suppression and non-publication orders made; plaintiff's application to extend time dismissed for the first six publications; Statement of Claim struck out with leave to commence defamation proceedings in relation to two later documents; plaintiff referred for pro bono assistance; matter stood over for further...
Orders
- ['The name of the plaintiff in these proceedings be known as the pseudonym "Bianca Castafiore".' 'The name of the second defendant in these proceedings be known as the pseudonym "Tristan Bior".' "The names of the plaintiff's children to remain unpublished." "The name of the plaintiff's children's father to remain...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment