Jenman v McIntyre [2013] NSWSC 1100

Jenman v McIntyre [2013] NSWSC 1100

Leave to continue the proceedings against the company in liquidation was refused on the basis that, although a serious claim and real dispute were disclosed and some protection to creditors could be afforded by conditions, the evidence showed a substantial risk that the scope and cost of the proceedings would be disproportionate relative to the limited scale of publication pleaded, prejudicing creditor interests. Portions of the defence and particulars that were argumentative, conclusory, or unsupported by adequate factual basis were ordered struck out or required further particulars. Discovery orders were made allowing most categories sought by the first defendant, except those...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Applications / Rulings on Various Interlocutory Applications, Including Applications for Leave, Strike Out, Particulars, and Discovery
Outcome
Plaintiff's application for leave to continue proceedings against second defendant in liquidation refused; parts of defence and particulars struck out; first defendant's application for further discovery allowed.
Legal Topics
['leave to Proceed Against Company in Liquidation' 'requirements for Particulars of Defences in Defamation' 'discovery in Defamation Proceedings' 'defamation Defences (honest Opinion, Justification, Fair Comment, Qualified Privilege, S 33 Defamation Act)']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure' 'corporate Insolvency'] ['leave to Proceed Against Company in Liquidation' 'requirements for Particulars of Defences in Defamation' 'discovery in Defamation Proceedings' 'defamation Defences (honest Opinion, Justification, Fair Comment, Qualified Privilege, S 33 Defamation Act)']

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 Applications / Rulings on Various Interlocutory Applications, Including Applications for Leave, Strike Out, Particulars, and Discovery

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should have leave to continue proceedings against company in liquidation under s 500(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)' "Whether the first defendant's defences of honest opinion, fair comment, and justification are adequately particularised" 'Whether parts of the defence and particulars ought to be struck out' 'Whether the first defendant is entitled to further discovery from the plaintiff']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to continue the proceedings against the company in liquidation was refused on the basis that, although a serious claim and real dispute were disclosed and some protection to creditors could be afforded by conditions, the evidence showed a substantial risk that the scope and cost of the proceedings would be disproportionate relative to the limited scale of publication pleaded, prejudicing creditor interests. Portions of the defence and particulars that were argumentative, conclusory, or unsupported by adequate factual basis were ordered struck out or required further particulars. Discovery orders were made allowing most categories sought by the first defendant, except those...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application for leave to continue proceedings against second defendant in liquidation refused; parts of defence and particulars struck out; first defendant's application for further discovery allowed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to proceed against the second defendant in liquidation refused' 'Parts of the defence and particulars struck out as specified in the judgment; further and better particulars ordered' "Plaintiff's application for leave to file second further amended statement of claim resolved by concessions" "First...