Molan v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 800

Molan v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 800

The articles and tweets were reasonably capable of conveying the plaintiff's pleaded imputations. In the original article and tweet, the express language and the innuendo, insinuation and implication were sufficient for the question whether the imputations were conveyed to go to the jury. Although the edited article and tweet presented a weaker case, remaining references and contextual material meant the issue was still arguable and should not be taken from the jury.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / First Listing; Defendants Objected That the Plaintiff's Imputations Were Not Reasonably Capable of Being Conveyed by the Matters Complained of
Outcome
Defendants' application to have the imputations taken from the jury refused; the plaintiff's imputations will go to the jury.
Legal Topics
['defamatory Meaning' 'capacity of Imputations' 'republication of Rumour' 'gossip Column' 'jury Determination of Imputations']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['defamatory Meaning' 'capacity of Imputations' 'republication of Rumour' 'gossip Column' 'jury Determination of 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 / First Listing; Defendants Objected That the Plaintiff's Imputations Were Not Reasonably Capable of Being Conveyed by the Matters Complained of

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the articles and tweets were reasonably capable of conveying the plaintiff's pleaded imputations." 'Whether publication of a rumoured affair in a gossip column, despite reported denials, could convey the defamatory imputations as allegations of fact.' 'Whether the edited article and edited tweet remained reasonably capable of conveying the pleaded imputations.']

Ratio Decidendi

The articles and tweets were reasonably capable of conveying the plaintiff's pleaded imputations. In the original article and tweet, the express language and the innuendo, insinuation and implication were sufficient for the question whether the imputations were conveyed to go to the jury. Although the edited article and tweet presented a weaker case, remaining references and contextual material meant the issue was still arguable and should not be taken from the jury.

Court Disposition

Defendants' application to have the imputations taken from the jury refused; the plaintiff's imputations will go to the jury.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff's imputations will go to the jury." "The defendants are to pay the plaintiff's costs of today's hearing."]