Brian Stanley Fisher v Channel Seven Sydney Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 1343

Brian Stanley Fisher v Channel Seven Sydney Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 1343

The publication was capable of conveying that the plaintiff was not suitable to drive buses, or at least buses carrying school children, and the pleaded contextual imputation that he was not a "fit and proper person" to be allowed to do so was not rhetorical or imprecise. In any event, the objection was raised at a very late stage after the pleadings had effectively been finalised since 2012, and allowing it would cause delay contrary to the case management obligations in the Civil Procedure Act 2005 and would not be required by procedural fairness.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Interlocutory Application on the First Day of a Jury Trial by the Plaintiff to Strike Out a Paragraph of the Defence Pleading Contextual Truth
Outcome
Plaintiff's application to strike out defence dismissed.
Legal Topics
['contextual Truth' 'strike Out Application' 'imputations' 'fit and Proper Person' 'case Management' 'procedural Fairness' 'delay']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['contextual Truth' 'strike Out Application' 'imputations' 'fit and Proper Person' 'case Management' 'procedural Fairness' 'delay']

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 / Interlocutory Application on the First Day of a Jury Trial by the Plaintiff to Strike Out a Paragraph of the Defence Pleading Contextual Truth

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the contextual truth imputation pleaded by the defendant was hypothetical or did not arise from the publication' 'Whether the use of the term "fit and proper" made the contextual imputation rhetorical, imprecise or otherwise unacceptable' "Whether the lateness of the plaintiff's objection justified refusing the strike out application on case management and procedural fairness grounds"]

Ratio Decidendi

The publication was capable of conveying that the plaintiff was not suitable to drive buses, or at least buses carrying school children, and the pleaded contextual imputation that he was not a "fit and proper person" to be allowed to do so was not rhetorical or imprecise. In any event, the objection was raised at a very late stage after the pleadings had effectively been finalised since 2012, and allowing it would cause delay contrary to the case management obligations in the Civil Procedure Act 2005 and would not be required by procedural fairness.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application to strike out defence dismissed.

Orders

  • ["Plaintiff's application to strike out defence dismissed." 'The application to strike out the pleading is dismissed.']