Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Hibbert [2015] NSWCA 13

Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Hibbert [2015] NSWCA 13

The applicants did not follow the procedures for separate determination under UCPR r 28.2; the primary judge’s decision was an interlocutory exercise of discretion on a procedural point, not final on substantive rights; no issue of principle or risk of injustice justifying the grant of leave to appeal was demonstrated; accordingly, leave to appeal is refused and the summons dismissed with costs.

Parties
First Applicant: Nationwide News Pty Limited; Second Applicant: Josh Massoud; Respondent: Darren Hibbert
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application (leave to Appeal) in Defamation Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Imputations in Defamation, Striking Out Pleadings, Leave to Appeal, Interlocutory Orders, Overriding Purpose (civil Procedure Act)
Defamation Civil Procedure Imputations in Defamation Striking Out Pleadings Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Orders Overriding Purpose (civil Procedure Act)

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nationwide News Pty Limited

First Applicant

Josh Massoud

Second Applicant

Darren Hibbert

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application (leave to Appeal) in Defamation Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether imputations (5b), (5c), (5d), and (5e) pleaded by the respondent differ in substance as required by UCPR r 14.30(3)
  2. 2 Whether the primary judge erred in not striking out certain imputations in the statement of claim
  3. 3 Whether leave to appeal from the interlocutory decision should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants did not follow the procedures for separate determination under UCPR r 28.2; the primary judge’s decision was an interlocutory exercise of discretion on a procedural point, not final on substantive rights; no issue of principle or risk of injustice justifying the grant of leave to appeal was demonstrated; accordingly, leave to appeal is refused and the summons dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The applicants' summons seeking leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicants pay the respondent's costs of the application.