Con Ange v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd & Ors [2011] NSWSC 204

Con Ange v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd & Ors [2011] NSWSC 204

The contextual imputations pleaded by the defendants in pars 14(a)(i)-(iv) and their counterparts do not differ in substance from, or are alternative formulations of, the plaintiff’s imputations, and therefore cannot be carried 'in addition to' the plaintiff's imputations as required by s 26(a) of the Defamation Act 2005 and must be struck out. Furthermore, the particulars pleaded to support the truth of certain imputations relate to events, shops and times not referred to in the article or imputations, and thus fall so far short of supporting the substantial truth of the pleaded imputations that they should be struck out.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Applications / Application to Strike Out Parts of Defence in Defamation Proceeding
Outcome
Application to strike out contextual imputations and particulars granted in part; costs ordered against defendants.
Legal Topics
['contextual Truth' 'justification' 'strike Out Applications' 'defamatory Imputations' 'substantial Truth']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['contextual Truth' 'justification' 'strike Out Applications' 'defamatory Imputations' 'substantial Truth']

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

Interlocutory Applications / Application to Strike Out Parts of Defence in Defamation Proceeding

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether contextual imputations pleaded by the defendants differ in substance from the plaintiff's imputations as required by s 26(a) of the Defamation Act 2005 and are capable of being carried 'in addition to' the plaintiff's imputations; Whether particulars pleaded in support of the defence of truth are capable of supporting the substantial truth of the plaintiff's imputations and should be struck out"]

Ratio Decidendi

The contextual imputations pleaded by the defendants in pars 14(a)(i)-(iv) and their counterparts do not differ in substance from, or are alternative formulations of, the plaintiff’s imputations, and therefore cannot be carried 'in addition to' the plaintiff's imputations as required by s 26(a) of the Defamation Act 2005 and must be struck out. Furthermore, the particulars pleaded to support the truth of certain imputations relate to events, shops and times not referred to in the article or imputations, and thus fall so far short of supporting the substantial truth of the pleaded imputations that they should be struck out.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out contextual imputations and particulars granted in part; costs ordered against defendants.

Orders

  • ['The contextual imputations in pars 14(a)(i), (ii), (iii) and (iv), and the corresponding contextual imputations in pars 15(a), 16(a), and 17(a) of the defence be struck out.' 'The particulars pleaded in the defence under the defence of truth to imputations 5(d) and 8(d), 5(e) and 8(e), and 5(g) and 8(g) be struck...