Ainsworth v Burden [2000] NSWSC 105

Ainsworth v Burden [2000] NSWSC 105

The pleaded imputations were not ambiguous, rhetorical, imprecise or duplicitous merely because they used the phrase "fit and proper person"; on the face of the publication the three imputations reflected distinctions drawn by the defendant's own words; and the tenor of the letter went beyond calling for inquiry by suggesting that inquiry would result in conclusions adverse to the plaintiff, so the publication was capable of conveying the pleaded imputations.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 March 2000
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Challenging Imputations in the Statement of Claim After Pleadings Had Closed
Outcome
None of the challenges to the statement of claim was made good.
Legal Topics
['defamatory Imputations' 'natural and Ordinary Meaning' 'capacity to Convey Imputations' 'pleading of Imputations' 'fit and Proper Person' 'scr Part 69 Rule 11(3)']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['defamatory Imputations' 'natural and Ordinary Meaning' 'capacity to Convey Imputations' 'pleading of Imputations' 'fit and Proper Person' 'scr Part 69 Rule 11(3)']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Defamation Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Challenging Imputations in the Statement of Claim After Pleadings Had Closed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the pleaded imputations using the phrase "fit and proper person" were ambiguous, rhetorical, imprecise or duplicitous.' 'Whether the three pleaded imputations differed in substance from one another for the purposes of SCR Part 69 rule 11(3).' 'Whether the publication was capable of conveying the pleaded imputations in its natural and ordinary meaning.']

Ratio Decidendi

The pleaded imputations were not ambiguous, rhetorical, imprecise or duplicitous merely because they used the phrase "fit and proper person"; on the face of the publication the three imputations reflected distinctions drawn by the defendant's own words; and the tenor of the letter went beyond calling for inquiry by suggesting that inquiry would result in conclusions adverse to the plaintiff, so the publication was capable of conveying the pleaded imputations.

Court Disposition

None of the challenges to the statement of claim was made good.

Orders

  • ["The defendant should pay the plaintiff's costs of the application."]