Alex v Gridneff (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 181

Alex v Gridneff (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 181

The pleaded imputation was capable of arising because the article suggested a strong basis for suspecting that the gunman attended over a business debt, named only Mr Bacic and Mr Alex as persons with such disputes with Mr Mitrovic, partly minimised Mr Bacic's role while giving no similar disclaimer for Mr Alex, and juxtaposed Mr Alex's significant business dispute with the circumstances of the death. After the plaintiff clarified that the shooting was alleged only as an unintended consequence of the visit, the asserted ambiguity did not justify striking out the imputation.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Interlocutory Application by the Second Defendant to Strike Out an Imputation Pleaded in Paragraph 6 of the Plaintiff's Amended Statement of Claim Pursuant to Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw), 14.28
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['whether an Imputation Is Capable of Arising' 'strike Out Application' 'ordinary Reasonable Reader' 'reasonable Grounds for Suspecting' 'ambiguity of Pleaded Imputation']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['whether an Imputation Is Capable of Arising' 'strike Out Application' 'ordinary Reasonable Reader' 'reasonable Grounds for Suspecting' 'ambiguity of Pleaded Imputation']

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 / Interlocutory Application by the Second Defendant to Strike Out an Imputation Pleaded in Paragraph 6 of the Plaintiff's Amended Statement of Claim Pursuant to Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw), 14.28

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the pleaded imputation that there were reasonable grounds to suspect the plaintiff arranged for the visit to Mr Mitrovic's premises was capable of arising from the matter complained of" 'Whether the words "during which visit Mr Mitrovic was shot dead" made the imputation impermissibly ambiguous as to whether the shooting was intended, foreseen, contemplated or unintended by the plaintiff']

Ratio Decidendi

The pleaded imputation was capable of arising because the article suggested a strong basis for suspecting that the gunman attended over a business debt, named only Mr Bacic and Mr Alex as persons with such disputes with Mr Mitrovic, partly minimised Mr Bacic's role while giving no similar disclaimer for Mr Alex, and juxtaposed Mr Alex's significant business dispute with the circumstances of the death. After the plaintiff clarified that the shooting was alleged only as an unintended consequence of the visit, the asserted ambiguity did not justify striking out the imputation.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Application to strike out imputation dismissed.' "The second defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs of the application."]