EDWARD OBEID v JOHN FAIRFAX PUBLICATIONS PTY LTD [2003] NSWSC 967
The jury was discharged as the statements made by the defendant’s counsel in relation to the presumption of innocence, and the suggestion that the jury 'needs' to see if the publisher adopted an allegation, were found to be prejudicial and could not be cured by judicial direction, thereby undermining a fair trial.
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Edward Obeid; Defendant: John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 23 October 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Defamation / Application for Discharge of Jury in S7 a Trial
- Outcome
- Jury discharged
- Legal Topics
- S7 a Trial, Jury Discharge, Counsel's Addresses, Presumption of Innocence, Imputations, Publisher's Adoption
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Edward Obeid
Plaintiff
John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Application for Discharge of Jury in S7 a Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the jury should be discharged due to prejudicial statements made during counsel's address regarding the presumption of innocence and publisher's adoption of allegations
Ratio Decidendi
The jury was discharged as the statements made by the defendant’s counsel in relation to the presumption of innocence, and the suggestion that the jury 'needs' to see if the publisher adopted an allegation, were found to be prejudicial and could not be cured by judicial direction, thereby undermining a fair trial.
Court Disposition
Jury discharged
Orders
- The jury is discharged.
- The defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs thrown away as a consequence of the discharge of the jury and the application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment