Tabbaa v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 921

Tabbaa v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 921

The defendant's objections were upheld in part because some pleaded imputations either included a sense not reasonably conveyed by the broadcast, adopted rhetorical hyperbole rather than distilling an act or condition attributed to the plaintiff, were hypothetical, or were ambiguous as to the threat alleged. Other objections failed because particular imputations were sufficiently distinct from more general imputations or raised matters capable of determination by a jury.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Procedural Rulings on Defendant's Objections to Imputations in an Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Defendant's objections upheld in part; parties to be heard on the form of orders.
Legal Topics
['pleadings' 'imputations' 'capacity' 'requirement That Imputations Differ in Substance']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['pleadings' 'imputations' 'capacity' 'requirement That Imputations Differ in Substance']

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

Defamation Proceedings / Procedural Rulings on Defendant's Objections to Imputations in an Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether imputation (f) was reasonably capable of conveying that the plaintiff beat his daughter while her aunt watched.' 'Whether imputation (g), that the plaintiff is the most evil person that anyone would ever meet, was bad in form because it adopted rhetorical hyperbole from the broadcast.' 'Whether imputation (j), that if the plaintiff had believed his daughter was not a virgin he would have killed her, was bad in form because it was hypothetical and failed to specify an existing act or condition.' "Whether imputations (k) and (l), concerning threats to slit the throats of the plaintiff's wife and Rania's sister, were capable of arising and were sufficiently distinct from a general imputation of violence and abuse towards his daughter." 'Whether imputation (n), that by forcing his daughter to marry her cousin the plaintiff committed a crime, differed in substance from the imputation that he forced his 13-year-old daughter to marry her cousin 15 years her senior and was capable of arising.']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's objections were upheld in part because some pleaded imputations either included a sense not reasonably conveyed by the broadcast, adopted rhetorical hyperbole rather than distilling an act or condition attributed to the plaintiff, were hypothetical, or were ambiguous as to the threat alleged. Other objections failed because particular imputations were sufficiently distinct from more general imputations or raised matters capable of determination by a jury.

Court Disposition

Defendant's objections upheld in part; parties to be heard on the form of orders.

Orders

  • ["The words 'whilst her aunt watched' should be struck from imputation (f)." 'Imputation (g) was held bad in form as rhetorical hyperbole not properly distilling the act or condition attributed to the plaintiff.' 'Imputation (j) was held bad in form because it was hypothetical and failed to specify an existing...