EDWARD OBEID v JOHN FAIRFAX PUBLICATIONS PTY LTD [2003] NSWSC 967

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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Obeid

Plaintiff

John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Application for Discharge of Jury in S7 a Trial

  1. 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.