McMahon v John Fairfax Publications Pty Limited (No 4) [2012] NSWSC 216

McMahon v John Fairfax Publications Pty Limited (No 4) [2012] NSWSC 216

The evidence of the plaintiff's overseas expenditure was admissible for the purpose of assessing credibility under s103 and s106 of the Evidence Act, but only with appropriate limits on questioning and redactions to the form of the evidence. The annual reports of the Commissioner of Taxation and the administrators' Deloitte report were excluded: the former on the ground that their probative value was substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice and doubts as to whether they were business records for s69, and the latter because it was either not a business record or, even if it were, its admission would be unfairly prejudicial as it did not meaningfully establish the existence of suspicion...

Parties
Plaintiff: Bryan McMahon; First Defendant: John Fairfax Publications Pty Limited; Second Defendant: Marcus Priest; Third Defendant: Rachel Nickless
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Defamation and Injurious Falsehood / Rulings on Evidence During Jury Trial
Outcome
Objections to overseas expenditure evidence overruled with limits; annual reports and administrators’ report excluded.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Business Records Exception, Defamation Imputations, Credibility of Witness
Defamation Evidence Law Insolvency Law Admissibility of Evidence Business Records Exception Defamation Imputations Credibility of Witness

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bryan McMahon

Plaintiff

John Fairfax Publications Pty Limited

First Defendant

Marcus Priest

Second Defendant

Rachel Nickless

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation and Injurious Falsehood / Rulings on Evidence During Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence of overseas expenditure is admissible for credibility or truth of imputations
  2. 2 Admissibility of extracts from annual reports of the Commissioner of Taxation as business records
  3. 3 Admissibility of administrators’ report as business record for insolvent trading imputation

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence of the plaintiff's overseas expenditure was admissible for the purpose of assessing credibility under s103 and s106 of the Evidence Act, but only with appropriate limits on questioning and redactions to the form of the evidence. The annual reports of the Commissioner of Taxation and the administrators' Deloitte report were excluded: the former on the ground that their probative value was substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice and doubts as to whether they were business records for s69, and the latter because it was either not a business record or, even if it were, its admission would be unfairly prejudicial as it did not meaningfully establish the existence of suspicion...

Court Disposition

Objections to overseas expenditure evidence overruled with limits; annual reports and administrators’ report excluded.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's objections to cross-examination regarding overseas expenditure dismissed with limitations on questions and evidence form.
  • Defendants' tender of extracts from annual reports of the Commissioner of Taxation excluded.