Ange v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd & Ors [2010] NSWSC 645

Ange v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd & Ors [2010] NSWSC 645

Contextual imputation (iv), alleging conduct involving deeply offensive language, must be struck out as it does not constitute an 'other imputation' under s 26 of the Defamation Act, being merely a rephrasing of plaintiff's pleaded imputation at a higher generality. All other challenged contextual imputations and particulars are permissible and will not be struck out or refused leave, as they are supported by the matter complained of and are capable of being conveyed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Interlocutory Application—striking Out Contextual Imputations and Particulars
Outcome
Contextual imputation (iv) struck out. All other applications refused.
Legal Topics
['pleadings' 'contextual Truth Defence' 'adequacy of Particulars' 'striking Out' 'bad Reputation']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['pleadings' 'contextual Truth Defence' 'adequacy of Particulars' 'striking Out' 'bad Reputation']

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 / Interlocutory Application—striking Out Contextual Imputations and Particulars

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether parts of truth and contextual truth defences should be struck out under UCPR 14.28(1)' 'Adequacy of particulars to support defence of truth' 'Capacity of matter complained of to convey contextual imputations' "Whether contextual imputation pleaded is an 'other imputation' under s 26 Defamation Act 2005" 'Effect of admission by plaintiff of some particulars of truth' 'Availability of particulars of bad reputation to support plea of bad reputation']

Ratio Decidendi

Contextual imputation (iv), alleging conduct involving deeply offensive language, must be struck out as it does not constitute an 'other imputation' under s 26 of the Defamation Act, being merely a rephrasing of plaintiff's pleaded imputation at a higher generality. All other challenged contextual imputations and particulars are permissible and will not be struck out or refused leave, as they are supported by the matter complained of and are capable of being conveyed.

Court Disposition

Contextual imputation (iv) struck out. All other applications refused.

Orders

  • ['Contextual imputation (iv) (conduct involving deeply offensive language) struck out.' 'Leave to amend defence granted to defendants for all other particulars.']