Murphy v Nationwide News Pty Limited (No 2) [2017] FCA 781

Murphy v Nationwide News Pty Limited (No 2) [2017] FCA 781

The publications were capable of conveying the pleaded imputations and the pleadings did not suffer from imprecision or ambiguity warranting strike out; the plea of contextual truth was insufficiently precise due to use of 'inappropriately', and was to be struck out with leave granted to amend.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application—strike Out Pleadings
Outcome
Respondents' strike out application dismissed; applicant's strike out application allowed; parts of Amended Defence struck out with leave to re-plead.
Legal Topics
['strike Out Applications' 'capacity of Publication to Convey Defamatory Imputations' 'contextual Truth' 'precision of Pleadings']
['practice and Procedure' 'defamation'] ['strike Out Applications' 'capacity of Publication to Convey Defamatory Imputations' 'contextual Truth' 'precision of Pleadings']

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

Civil / Interlocutory Application—strike Out Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the publications are capable of conveying the pleaded defamatory imputations' 'Whether certain imputations are imprecise or ambiguous' 'Whether the pleaded imputations differ in substance' 'Adequacy of the plea of contextual truth']

Ratio Decidendi

The publications were capable of conveying the pleaded imputations and the pleadings did not suffer from imprecision or ambiguity warranting strike out; the plea of contextual truth was insufficiently precise due to use of 'inappropriately', and was to be struck out with leave granted to amend.

Court Disposition

Respondents' strike out application dismissed; applicant's strike out application allowed; parts of Amended Defence struck out with leave to re-plead.

Orders

  • ["The Respondents' interlocutory application filed on 9 June 2017 is dismissed." "The Applicant's interlocutory application filed on 22 June 2017 is allowed." 'Paragraphs [13(a)] and [14] of the Amended Defence be struck out.' 'The Respondents have leave to file and serve an Amended Defence by 26 July 2017.']