Scott v Bodley (No 2) [2022] NSWDC 651

Scott v Bodley (No 2) [2022] NSWDC 651

The plaintiff failed to establish that the allegedly defamatory reviews were read or accessed by any third party, failed to provide a platform of facts or causation, and did not demonstrate serious harm to reputation as required by s 10A of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW); the proceedings must therefore be dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Determination of Serious Harm (pre Trial, Preliminary Issue)
Outcome
proceedings dismissed for failure to establish serious harm (threshold issue)
Legal Topics
['defamation' 'serious Harm' 'online Reviews' 'threshold Requirements']

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 / Determination of Serious Harm (pre Trial, Preliminary Issue)

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff has established 'serious harm' to reputation as required by s 10A of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW)" 'Whether online publication was read or accessed' 'Whether negative online reviews can constitute serious harm for a small business']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to establish that the allegedly defamatory reviews were read or accessed by any third party, failed to provide a platform of facts or causation, and did not demonstrate serious harm to reputation as required by s 10A of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW); the proceedings must therefore be dismissed.

Court Disposition

proceedings dismissed for failure to establish serious harm (threshold issue)

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 28.2, the plaintiff has failed to establish serious harm to reputation as required under s 10A of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) and the proceedings are dismissed.' "The plaintiff is to pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings, with liberty to apply."]