M v Public Guardian [2017] NSWDC 253

M v Public Guardian [2017] NSWDC 253

Leave to discontinue was granted only on terms because the defendant had acted reasonably, the plaintiff's pleadings were defective, the plaintiff had failed to comply with court timetables and had allowed the limitation period to elapse, and discontinuance without protective terms risked further reputation-based proceedings arising from the same publications. A gross sum costs order was warranted, and after applying discounts the defendant's costs were assessed at $8,000. Judgment for the defendant was inappropriate because the matters complained of were not attached or clearly identified, but a condition precluding further defamation or similar reputation-based proceedings based on the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation Proceedings / Application for Leave to Discontinue Under R 12.1 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw), Including Issues of Costs and Restrictions on Further Proceedings
Outcome
Leave to discontinue granted on conditions, including a gross sum costs order for the defendant and a prohibition on further defamation or similar reputation-based proceedings based on the publications identified in the statement of claim.
Legal Topics
['leave to Discontinue' 'discontinuance on Terms' 'gross Sum Costs Order' 'further Defamation Proceedings' 'reputation Based Relief' 'multiple Publication Rule' 'limitation Period']
['tort' 'defamation' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['leave to Discontinue' 'discontinuance on Terms' 'gross Sum Costs Order' 'further Defamation Proceedings' 'reputation Based Relief' 'multiple Publication Rule' 'limitation Period']

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 / Application for Leave to Discontinue Under R 12.1 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw), Including Issues of Costs and Restrictions on Further Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to discontinue the defamation proceedings under r 12.1 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).' 'Whether leave to discontinue should be granted only on terms, including costs and restrictions on further proceedings.' 'Whether the defendant should receive a gross sum costs order and in what amount.' 'Whether judgment should be entered for the defendant or other restrictions imposed to prevent further reputation-based proceedings arising from the same publications.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to discontinue was granted only on terms because the defendant had acted reasonably, the plaintiff's pleadings were defective, the plaintiff had failed to comply with court timetables and had allowed the limitation period to elapse, and discontinuance without protective terms risked further reputation-based proceedings arising from the same publications. A gross sum costs order was warranted, and after applying discounts the defendant's costs were assessed at $8,000. Judgment for the defendant was inappropriate because the matters complained of were not attached or clearly identified, but a condition precluding further defamation or similar reputation-based proceedings based on the...

Court Disposition

Leave to discontinue granted on conditions, including a gross sum costs order for the defendant and a prohibition on further defamation or similar reputation-based proceedings based on the publications identified in the statement of claim.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to r 12.1 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), grant leave to the plaintiff to discontinue these proceedings upon the following conditions.' "The plaintiff is to pay the defendant's costs of these proceedings (including this application), which are assessed on a gross sum costs order basis, of...