Munsie v Dowling [2014] NSWSC 458

Munsie v Dowling [2014] NSWSC 458

The plaintiffs have not established that the defendant has threatened, or is likely to threaten, to publish as yet undisclosed material or act in a way calculated to interfere with the proper administration of justice; there is no objective evidence of improper threat or pressure, and the material published does not constitute contempt or abuse of process justifying restraint. The plaintiffs' concerns relate only to continued publication of already published material, which did not dissuade them from commencing proceedings. Accordingly, interim injunctive and suppression relief is not warranted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion in Supreme Court Proceedings (defamation/contempt) / Interlocutory Application for Injunction and Suppression Order, Decision on Interim Relief
Outcome
Plaintiffs' application for interim injunction and suppression order declined; procedural orders made in respect of contempt application and evidence.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunctions' 'suppression and Non Publication Orders' 'abuse of Process' 'obstruction of Administration of Justice']
['defamation' 'contempt of Court' 'civil Procedure'] ['interlocutory Injunctions' 'suppression and Non Publication Orders' 'abuse of Process' 'obstruction of Administration of Justice']

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

Notice of Motion in Supreme Court Proceedings (defamation/contempt) / Interlocutory Application for Injunction and Suppression Order, Decision on Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether threatened publication constitutes abuse of process or obstruction of the due administration of justice' 'Whether threat of publication should be restrained as contempt of court' 'Whether interlocutory injunction or suppression order should be granted']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs have not established that the defendant has threatened, or is likely to threaten, to publish as yet undisclosed material or act in a way calculated to interfere with the proper administration of justice; there is no objective evidence of improper threat or pressure, and the material published does not constitute contempt or abuse of process justifying restraint. The plaintiffs' concerns relate only to continued publication of already published material, which did not dissuade them from commencing proceedings. Accordingly, interim injunctive and suppression relief is not warranted.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' application for interim injunction and suppression order declined; procedural orders made in respect of contempt application and evidence.

Orders

  • ["Decline to make orders 4 and 5 in the plaintiffs' notice of motion filed in Court on 17 April 2014." "Stand over the balance of the plaintiffs' notice of motion to 10am on Friday 16 May 2014 before the Duty Judge for directions." "Note that the plaintiffs' evidence in support of the contempt application is...