Brigg v Reid & Anor [2002] NSWSC 80

The contextual imputations pleaded do not differ in substance from the plaintiff's imputations, nor are they capable of being rationally considered to affect reputation so that the plaintiff's imputations do not further injure reputation; accordingly, paragraphs 9 and 13 of the Defence are struck out.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 22 February 2002
Procedural Posture: Defamation / Application to Strike Out Contextual Truth Defence
Outcome: Application allowed. Contextual truth defence struck out.
Legal Topics: ['contextual Truth Defence' 'particulars of Truth' 'strike Out Application']

['defamation'] ['contextual Truth Defence' 'particulars of Truth' 'strike Out Application']

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

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Application to Strike Out Contextual Truth Defence

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether the defendants' contextual imputations differ in substance from the plaintiff's imputations" 'Whether the contextual imputations are capable of being conveyed by the matter complained of' "Whether the contextual imputations' substantial truth could rationally affect the plaintiff's reputation"]

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Contextual truth defence struck out.

Orders

['Paragraphs 9 and 13 of Defence to Amended Statement of Claim filed 8 August 2001 are struck out.' "Defendants to pay plaintiff's costs." 'Matter stood over for directions in the Defamation List on 8 March 2002.']