Creak v Channel Seven Sydney Pty Ltd (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 512

Creak v Channel Seven Sydney Pty Ltd (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 512

Given the substantial overlap between the defamation and injurious falsehood claims and the complication that damages for defamation are determined by the judge while damages for injurious falsehood in jury proceedings would ordinarily be determined by the jury, it was appropriate to make the consent orders...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Proceedings Involving Claims in Defamation, Injurious Falsehood, Trespass and Misleading or Deceptive Conduct / Procedural Ruling on Jury Trial and Separate Determination of Damages
Outcome
Orders made by consent.
Legal Topics
['trial by Jury' 'separate Determination of Issues' 'damages' 'actual Loss']
['civil Procedure' 'defamation' 'injurious Falsehood' 'trespass' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct'] ['trial by Jury' 'separate Determination of Issues' 'damages' 'actual Loss']

Source-derived case record

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

Proceedings Involving Claims in Defamation, Injurious Falsehood, Trespass and Misleading or Deceptive Conduct / Procedural Ruling on Jury Trial and Separate Determination of Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether issues relating to the claim in injurious falsehood, other than actual loss and damages, should be tried by a jury.' 'Whether damages for all claims and actual loss for the injurious falsehood claim should be determined separately from, and after, the other issues in the proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

Given the substantial overlap between the defamation and injurious falsehood claims and the complication that damages for defamation are determined by the judge while damages for injurious falsehood in jury proceedings would ordinarily be determined by the jury, it was appropriate to make the consent orders separating the determination of damages and actual loss and ordering jury trial of the remaining injurious falsehood issues.

Court Disposition

Orders made by consent.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 85 of the Supreme Court Act, all issues relating to the claim in injurious falsehood, other than actual loss and damages, be tried by a jury, with the intent that the latter issues be reserved to the trial judge.' 'Pursuant to UCPR r 28.2, all issues of damages in respect of all claims brought by the...