Assaf v Skalkos [1999] NSWSC 1332

Assaf v Skalkos [1999] NSWSC 1332

The circumstances of the publications did not make harm unlikely. The letter to the Prime Minister's office concerned the highest political office in the country and ethnic media matters and had a significant propensity to cause harm. The Novosti publication had a substantial potential readership, concerned serious allegations about ethnic media advertising, and if the first plaintiff was identified, its width and seriousness meant the s13 defence could not run. Accordingly the s13 defences were not available and were taken away from the jury.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 1999
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Application by the Plaintiffs for Defences Under S13 of the Defamation Act 1974 to Be Taken Away From the Jury
Outcome
Application granted.
Legal Topics
['unlikelihood of Harm Defence' 'publication' 'limited Publication' 'mass Media Publication' 'jury Directions']
['torts' 'defamation' 'evidence'] ['unlikelihood of Harm Defence' 'publication' 'limited Publication' 'mass Media Publication' 'jury Directions']

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 / Application by the Plaintiffs for Defences Under S13 of the Defamation Act 1974 to Be Taken Away From the Jury

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the circumstances of the publication of the letter to the Prime Minister's office were such that the plaintiffs were not likely to suffer harm under s13 of the Defamation Act 1974." 'Whether the circumstances of the Novosti publication were such that the plaintiffs were not likely to suffer harm under s13 of the Defamation Act 1974.' "Whether the defendants' s13 defences should be taken away from the jury."]

Ratio Decidendi

The circumstances of the publications did not make harm unlikely. The letter to the Prime Minister's office concerned the highest political office in the country and ethnic media matters and had a significant propensity to cause harm. The Novosti publication had a substantial potential readership, concerned serious allegations about ethnic media advertising, and if the first plaintiff was identified, its width and seriousness meant the s13 defence could not run. Accordingly the s13 defences were not available and were taken away from the jury.

Court Disposition

Application granted.

Orders

  • ['The defence under s13 of the Defamation Act 1974 was taken away from the jury in relation to the first publication and all imputations.' 'The defence under s13 of the Defamation Act 1974 was taken away from the jury in relation to the second publication with regard to both plaintiffs and all imputations.']