Minus v Harbour Radio Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 191

Minus v Harbour Radio Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 191

Leave to file an amended pleading including the specified imputations was refused because several imputations were bad in form or insufficiently precise, particularly where they used slang or rhetorical expressions that added insult but not clarity, and because framing an imputation by reference to being "Putin-like" was undesirable and not sufficiently clear or singular in meaning. The Court was not persuaded that the challenged imputations concerning the plaintiff's role in forcing the Roches into arbitration were incapable of arising, but those imputations were nevertheless not permitted in their proposed form.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Plaintiff's Application for Leave to File an Amended Pleading; Determination of Defendants' Objections to Proposed Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Leave refused in part
Legal Topics
['defamation Pleadings' 'imputations' 'precision of Pleadings' 'duplicative Imputations' 'capacity of Matter Complained of to Convey Imputations']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['defamation Pleadings' 'imputations' 'precision of Pleadings' 'duplicative Imputations' 'capacity of Matter Complained of to Convey Imputations']

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 Proceedings / Plaintiff's Application for Leave to File an Amended Pleading; Determination of Defendants' Objections to Proposed Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether proposed imputations were sufficiently precise to be pleaded in defamation proceedings.' 'Whether imputations using terms such as "colluded with" and "was complicit in" were permissible or too imprecise.' 'Whether slang or rhetorical expressions such as "bastardry and mongrel behaviour", "vandals", "Putin-like" and "mongrel mob" could properly be included in pleaded imputations.' 'Whether two pleaded imputations in respect of the second matter complained of differed in substance for the purposes of r 14.30(3) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).' 'Whether certain imputations were incapable of arising from the radio broadcasts.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to file an amended pleading including the specified imputations was refused because several imputations were bad in form or insufficiently precise, particularly where they used slang or rhetorical expressions that added insult but not clarity, and because framing an imputation by reference to being "Putin-like" was undesirable and not sufficiently clear or singular in meaning. The Court was not persuaded that the challenged imputations concerning the plaintiff's role in forcing the Roches into arbitration were incapable of arising, but those imputations were nevertheless not permitted in their proposed form.

Court Disposition

Leave refused in part

Orders

  • ['Leave to file an amended pleading that includes imputations in the form of imputations 5(i), 6A(g), 6A(h), 6A(k), 7A(c) and 7A(g) in the proposed amended statement of claim refused.']