SMEC HOLDINGS LIMITED & ORS v BONIFACE [2003] NSWSC 555

SMEC HOLDINGS LIMITED & ORS v BONIFACE [2003] NSWSC 555

In determining whether the pleaded imputations are proper in form, differ in substance, and are capable of being defamatory, each is to be assessed in light of the publication's context, applicable general principles, and whether it could disparage the plaintiff's reputation—a matter for the jury unless incapable as a matter of law. Most of the plaintiffs' pleaded imputations are to go to the jury; only a limited few are struck out for lack of capability or difference in substance.

Parties
First Plaintiff: SMEC HOLDINGS LIMITED; Second Plaintiff: PETER BUSBRIDGE; Third Plaintiff: ROSS HITT; Fourth Plaintiff: GEOFF PERCIVAL; Defendant: GLEN BONIFACE
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Interlocutory Application Regarding Imputations in Statement of Claim
Outcome
Application predominantly dismissed. Leave granted to amend statement of claim only as per reasons. Defendant to pay plaintiff's costs. Matter listed for further directions.
Legal Topics
Imputations, Corporation Liability for Defamation, Capacity, Form of Imputations, Difference in Substance
Defamation Imputations Corporation Liability for Defamation Capacity Form of Imputations Difference in Substance

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SMEC HOLDINGS LIMITED

First Plaintiff

PETER BUSBRIDGE

Second Plaintiff

ROSS HITT

Third Plaintiff

GEOFF PERCIVAL

Fourth Plaintiff

GLEN BONIFACE

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Interlocutory Application Regarding Imputations in Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether various pleaded imputations are capable of being defamatory
  2. 2 Whether pleaded imputations differ in substance or are repetitive
  3. 3 Whether certain imputations are proper in form as against a corporation

Ratio Decidendi

In determining whether the pleaded imputations are proper in form, differ in substance, and are capable of being defamatory, each is to be assessed in light of the publication's context, applicable general principles, and whether it could disparage the plaintiff's reputation—a matter for the jury unless incapable as a matter of law. Most of the plaintiffs' pleaded imputations are to go to the jury; only a limited few are struck out for lack of capability or difference in substance.

Court Disposition

Application predominantly dismissed. Leave granted to amend statement of claim only as per reasons. Defendant to pay plaintiff's costs. Matter listed for further directions.

Orders

  • Leave to file amended statement of claim only in accordance with judgment reasons.
  • No leave to plead fresh matters.