Eardley v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 1374

Eardley v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 1374

The defendants' particulars relating only to the plaintiff 'liking' a Facebook post are incapable of proving imputations 5(a), (b), and (c) (which require actual responsibility or instigation). In respect of the remaining imputations, liking a post may potentially engage enough to justify those issues going before a jury. The contextual imputation (iv) is incapable of arising in addition to imputation 5(e) and must be struck out.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Application to Strike Out Defences and Contextual Imputations
Outcome
Plaintiff's application partially allowed
Legal Topics
['truth Defence' 'contextual Truth' 'defamation' "facebook 'like' Liability" 'strike Out Application']
['defamation'] ['truth Defence' 'contextual Truth' 'defamation' "facebook 'like' Liability" '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
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Application to Strike Out Defences and Contextual Imputations

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether liking a Facebook post is capable of establishing responsibility for publication in defamation law' "Whether the particulars pleaded are capable of supporting the truth defence to plaintiff's imputations 5(a), (b), (c)" "Whether contextual imputations differ in substance from plaintiff's imputations and are capable of supporting contextual truth defence"]

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants' particulars relating only to the plaintiff 'liking' a Facebook post are incapable of proving imputations 5(a), (b), and (c) (which require actual responsibility or instigation). In respect of the remaining imputations, liking a post may potentially engage enough to justify those issues going before a jury. The contextual imputation (iv) is incapable of arising in addition to imputation 5(e) and must be struck out.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application partially allowed

Orders

  • ["Truth defence struck out in respect of plaintiff's imputations 5(a), (b), (c)" "Plaintiff's other objections to truth defence rejected" 'Contextual imputation (iv) struck out' 'Plaintiff has leave to file a further amended statement of claim appropriating the remaining contextual imputations on conditions...