Ghosh v Ninemsn Pty Ltd & Ors (No 2) [2013] NSWDC 145

Ghosh v Ninemsn Pty Ltd & Ors (No 2) [2013] NSWDC 145

Leave to file the proposed amended statement of claim is refused due to numerous pleading deficiencies, time-barred claims, insufficient particulars, and abuse of process regarding duplicate proceedings; however, leave is granted to serve a further draft statement of claim for a limited set of publications with proper particulars, and proceedings against certain defendants are dismissed for lack of actionable claims.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Leave to file amended statement of claim refused, leave to serve further draft in relation to certain publications granted; proceedings against certain defendants dismissed; costs ordered against plaintiff; matter stood over for further directions.
Legal Topics
['defamation' 'case Management' 'limitation Period' 'leave to Amend' 'costs' 'litigant in Person' 'particulars of Pleading']
['tort'] ['defamation' 'case Management' 'limitation Period' 'leave to Amend' 'costs' 'litigant in Person' 'particulars of Pleading']

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 / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to amend the statement of claim for defamation' 'Whether claims for publications outside the limitation period are maintainable' 'Whether proper particulars of identification and publication have been provided' 'Case management issues for complex defamation claims' 'Degree of court assistance appropriate for litigants in person' 'Claims for breach of statutory provisions in defamation pleadings']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to file the proposed amended statement of claim is refused due to numerous pleading deficiencies, time-barred claims, insufficient particulars, and abuse of process regarding duplicate proceedings; however, leave is granted to serve a further draft statement of claim for a limited set of publications with proper particulars, and proceedings against certain defendants are dismissed for lack of actionable claims.

Court Disposition

Leave to file amended statement of claim refused, leave to serve further draft in relation to certain publications granted; proceedings against certain defendants dismissed; costs ordered against plaintiff; matter stood over for further directions.

Orders

  • ["Plaintiff's application for leave to file the proposed amended statement of claim refused, leave to serve a further draft by 20 September 2013 for publications 29, 30, 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 51, 52." 'Plaintiff to provide transcript of parts of 39th and 40th publications; first and second defendants to attempt to...