Lakaev v Denny [2010] NSWSC 1480

Lakaev v Denny [2010] NSWSC 1480

The plaintiff failed to prove that it was not reasonable for her to have commenced proceedings within the limitation period, given her knowledge of the limitation period, deliberate election to adopt a retaliatory blogging strategy, and insufficient explanation for delays. There was no evidence of continuing publication sufficient to renew limitation periods.

Parties
Plaintiff: Natasha Lakaev; 1st Defendant: Annette Denny; 2nd Defendant: Warren Denny
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Application to Extend Limitation Period
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Limitation Period, Online Publication, Continuing Publication, Reasonableness Test
Defamation Limitation of Actions Extension of Limitation Period Online Publication Continuing Publication Reasonableness Test

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Natasha Lakaev

Plaintiff

Annette Denny

1st Defendant

Warren Denny

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Application to Extend Limitation Period

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an extension of the one year limitation period for commencing a defamation action under s 56A of the Limitation Act 1969
  2. 2 Whether there was continuing publication of defamatory material on the Rick Ross website to circumvent the limitation period
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff's circumstances satisfy the statutory reasonableness test

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to prove that it was not reasonable for her to have commenced proceedings within the limitation period, given her knowledge of the limitation period, deliberate election to adopt a retaliatory blogging strategy, and insufficient explanation for delays. There was no evidence of continuing publication sufficient to renew limitation periods.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The plaintiff's notice of motion is dismissed.
  • The plaintiff is to pay the defendants' costs.