Linnell v Channel Seven Sydney Pty Ltd (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 209

Linnell v Channel Seven Sydney Pty Ltd (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 209

Leave to include only those imputations that are sufficiently particularised, differ in substance, and are capable of arising from the publications. Direct lifting of phrases from broadcasts without distilling the defamatory sting is not generally permissible unless the broadcast provides no further particularity. Several duplicative or insufficiently particularised imputations were disallowed; some forms were permitted, subject to amendment. Plaintiff ordered to serve proposed pleading in accordance with these rulings and to pay 60% of defendants' costs of the day and application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Leave to File Second Further Amended Statement of Claim; Costs Application
Outcome
Application granted in part; leave given to file amended pleading as per judgment; costs ordered against plaintiff
Legal Topics
['pleading of Imputations' 'defamatory Meaning' 'costs Orders' 'interlocutory Pleadings']
['defamation'] ['pleading of Imputations' 'defamatory Meaning' 'costs Orders' 'interlocutory Pleadings']

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

Interlocutory Application / Leave to File Second Further Amended Statement of Claim; Costs Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether pleaded imputations differ in substance per Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 r 14.30(3)' 'Whether pleaded imputations are capable of arising from the publication' 'Whether pleaded imputations are capable of being defamatory' 'Appropriate principles for pleading imputations in defamation' 'Appropriate costs order on interlocutory application']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to include only those imputations that are sufficiently particularised, differ in substance, and are capable of arising from the publications. Direct lifting of phrases from broadcasts without distilling the defamatory sting is not generally permissible unless the broadcast provides no further particularity. Several duplicative or insufficiently particularised imputations were disallowed; some forms were permitted, subject to amendment. Plaintiff ordered to serve proposed pleading in accordance with these rulings and to pay 60% of defendants' costs of the day and application.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; leave given to file amended pleading as per judgment; costs ordered against plaintiff

Orders

  • ['Order the plaintiff to serve a proposed Second Further Amended Statement of Claim consistent with this judgment within 21 days.' "Order the plaintiff to pay 60% of the defendant's costs of today and costs related to today's application."]