Trad v Harbour Radio Pty Ltd [2010] NSWCA 41

Trad v Harbour Radio Pty Ltd [2010] NSWCA 41

The appeal is competent as the claim that the matter at issue involves $100,000 or more is both credible and realistic, considering the serious nature of the defamatory imputations and assuming the plaintiff's success on all appeal grounds. A stay is granted for execution and enforcement of the costs order but not for the assessment process, as there is no evidence of financial inability and an agreement exists regarding potential indemnity costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Notices of Motion
Outcome
Notice of Motion by defendant dismissed; partial success on plaintiff's stay application; costs orders made accordingly.
Legal Topics
['appeal Competency' 'stay of Execution' 'costs' 'quantum of Damages' 'assessment of Costs']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['appeal Competency' 'stay of Execution' 'costs' 'quantum of Damages' 'assessment of Costs']

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

Appeal / Judgment on Notices of Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appeal is competent as of right under s 101(2)(r) of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (i.e., involves a matter at issue amounting to $100,000 or more)' 'Whether a stay of execution and enforcement of costs order and of assessment of costs should be granted']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is competent as the claim that the matter at issue involves $100,000 or more is both credible and realistic, considering the serious nature of the defamatory imputations and assuming the plaintiff's success on all appeal grounds. A stay is granted for execution and enforcement of the costs order but not for the assessment process, as there is no evidence of financial inability and an agreement exists regarding potential indemnity costs.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion by defendant dismissed; partial success on plaintiff's stay application; costs orders made accordingly.

Orders

  • ['Order that the Notice of Motion filed by the defendant on 6 November 2009 be dismissed.' "Order that the plaintiff pay the defendant's costs of that Motion up to and including 22 February 2010 and that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the Motion thereafter." "Order that the execution and enforcement of...