Haddon v Steele [2011] NSWCA 323

Haddon v Steele [2011] NSWCA 323

There were no reasonable prospects of success in challenging the primary judge’s findings on qualified privilege, malice, and justification; the cost expended was not a sufficient ground for granting leave to appeal in the context of the small award of damages.

Parties
Applicant: Bruce Haddon; First Respondent: The Reverend Dominic Steele; Second Respondent: Evan Batten
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Qualified Privilege, Malice, Leave to Appeal, Costs, Justification
Defamation Civil Procedure Qualified Privilege Malice Leave to Appeal Costs Justification

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bruce Haddon

Applicant

The Reverend Dominic Steele

First Respondent

Evan Batten

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the primary judge erred in finding qualified privilege
  2. 2 Whether malice was established
  3. 3 Whether costs expended for a small award is a basis for leave to appeal

Ratio Decidendi

There were no reasonable prospects of success in challenging the primary judge’s findings on qualified privilege, malice, and justification; the cost expended was not a sufficient ground for granting leave to appeal in the context of the small award of damages.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.