Con Ange v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd & Ors [2010] NSWSC 1383

Con Ange v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd & Ors [2010] NSWSC 1383

The court held that none of the plaintiff’s grounds—neither the potentially offensive nature or number of DVDs nor the volume of documents—were sufficient or appropriately substantiated to justify exercising the statutory discretion to dispense with the jury, given that Parliament intended for parties to elect jury trial subject only to a broad but not lightly exercised judicial discretion. Robustness of juries and trial management were sufficient to address the plaintiff's concerns.

Parties
Plaintiff: Con Ange; 1st Defendant: Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd; 2nd Defendant: Fairfax Digital Australia & New Zealand Pty Ltd; 3rd Defendant: Jacqueline Magnay
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Defamation Proceedings / Application to Dispense With Jury Prior to Trial
Outcome
Application to dispense with jury dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Trial by Jury, Statutory Interpretation, Discretion to Dispense With Jury, Case Management
Defamation Civil Procedure Trial by Jury Statutory Interpretation Discretion to Dispense With Jury Case Management

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 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Con Ange

Plaintiff

Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd

1st Defendant

Fairfax Digital Australia & New Zealand Pty Ltd

2nd Defendant

Jacqueline Magnay

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application in Defamation Proceedings / Application to Dispense With Jury Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to dispense with a jury under s 21 of the Defamation Act 2005 where the defendants have elected for jury trial
  2. 2 Whether the offensive nature or quantity of DVD evidence, or volume of documentary evidence, are grounds for dispensing with a jury

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that none of the plaintiff’s grounds—neither the potentially offensive nature or number of DVDs nor the volume of documents—were sufficient or appropriately substantiated to justify exercising the statutory discretion to dispense with the jury, given that Parliament intended for parties to elect jury trial subject only to a broad but not lightly exercised judicial discretion. Robustness of juries and trial management were sufficient to address the plaintiff's concerns.

Court Disposition

Application to dispense with jury dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Application by plaintiff to dispense with jury dismissed.
  • Plaintiff to pay the defendant's cost of the application.