Ha v Cho (No. 2) [2015] NSWDC 210

Ha v Cho (No. 2) [2015] NSWDC 210

Because the proceeding was a slander case and the meaning and defamatory sting would depend on what words were found to have been spoken, it was proper for the plaintiff to plead both imputations; however, since the parties conceded the imputations could not arise at the same time and imputation (b) was of lesser seriousness, imputation (b) should be repleaded as a fall-back to imputation (a).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation Proceedings for Slander / Procedural Ruling on Pleading Imputation (b) as a Fall Back to Imputation (a)
Outcome
Defendants' application successful; imputation (b) ordered to be repleaded as a fall-back to imputation (a), with the plaintiff to pay the defendants' costs.
Legal Topics
['slander' 'form of Imputations' 'fall Back Imputations' 'pleadings']
['tort' 'defamation'] ['slander' 'form of Imputations' 'fall Back Imputations' 'pleadings']

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

Civil Defamation Proceedings for Slander / Procedural Ruling on Pleading Imputation (b) as a Fall Back to Imputation (a)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should be forced to choose between imputation (a) and imputation (b), or plead imputation (b) as a fall-back to imputation (a).' 'Whether issues of capacity should be reserved to the trial in proceedings for slander.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the proceeding was a slander case and the meaning and defamatory sting would depend on what words were found to have been spoken, it was proper for the plaintiff to plead both imputations; however, since the parties conceded the imputations could not arise at the same time and imputation (b) was of lesser seriousness, imputation (b) should be repleaded as a fall-back to imputation (a).

Court Disposition

Defendants' application successful; imputation (b) ordered to be repleaded as a fall-back to imputation (a), with the plaintiff to pay the defendants' costs.

Orders

  • ["Note the parties' agreement that issues of capacity are reserved to the trial, as these are proceedings for slander." 'Pursuant to UCPR r 14.28, imputation (b) be repleaded as a fall-back to imputation (a).' "Plaintiff pay defendants' costs." "Plaintiff's amended statement of claim in 7 days." 'Defences 21 days...