Park v Choi [2019] NSWDC 660

Park v Choi [2019] NSWDC 660

Imputations arising from the first publication are not reasonably capable of being conveyed as defamatory and/or suffer from deficiencies in pleading; the claim regarding publication 1 is struck out with leave to replead. For publications 2–4, many imputations are insufficient or rolled-up and must be repleaded, but the plaintiff is granted leave to do so. Summary dismissal is refused at this stage to allow proper identification of any actionable defamatory sting through improved pleadings. Costs are reserved pending final resolution of disputes regarding the pleadings and other outstanding issues.

Parties
Plaintiff: Hee Yeul Park; First Defendant: Dong Hun Choi; Second Defendant: Seung Ju Hong; Third Defendant: Won Hyo Cho; Fourth Defendant: Hyun Pil Moon; Fifth Defendant: Jong Bae Park; Sixth Defendant: Beck Seon Lee
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Procedural/interlocutory Hearing on Pleadings (form and Capacity of Imputations) in Defamation Proceedings
Outcome
Claim for publication 1 struck out with leave to replead; leave granted to replead imputations for publications 2–4; proceedings relisted for directions; costs reserved; summary dismissal refused.
Legal Topics
Defamation, Pleadings, Striking Out, Summary Dismissal, Form and Capacity of Imputation
Tort Defamation Pleadings Striking Out Summary Dismissal Form and Capacity of 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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hee Yeul Park

Plaintiff

Dong Hun Choi

First Defendant

Seung Ju Hong

Second Defendant

Won Hyo Cho

Third Defendant

Hyun Pil Moon

Fourth Defendant

Jong Bae Park

Fifth Defendant

Beck Seon Lee

Sixth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Procedural/interlocutory Hearing on Pleadings (form and Capacity of Imputations) in Defamation Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pleaded imputations arising from the four Korean-language publications are capable of being defamatory or require redrafting due to deficiencies of form or substance
  2. 2 Whether the claim for publication 1 should be struck out or summarily dismissed for lack of defamatory meaning
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to replead the statement of claim and true innuendo pleas

Ratio Decidendi

Imputations arising from the first publication are not reasonably capable of being conveyed as defamatory and/or suffer from deficiencies in pleading; the claim regarding publication 1 is struck out with leave to replead. For publications 2–4, many imputations are insufficient or rolled-up and must be repleaded, but the plaintiff is granted leave to do so. Summary dismissal is refused at this stage to allow proper identification of any actionable defamatory sting through improved pleadings. Costs are reserved pending final resolution of disputes regarding the pleadings and other outstanding issues.

Court Disposition

Claim for publication 1 struck out with leave to replead; leave granted to replead imputations for publications 2–4; proceedings relisted for directions; costs reserved; summary dismissal refused.

Orders

  • The claim for publication 1 set out in paragraphs 3 – 5A of the statement of claim is struck out, with leave to replead.
  • The plaintiff is granted leave to replead the imputations in publications 2 – 4 in accordance with my rulings set out above and, where compliance with those rulings impinges upon other imputations, to redraft those imputations as well.