O'Shane v John Fairfax Publications P/L [2001] NSWSC 264

O'Shane v John Fairfax Publications P/L [2001] NSWSC 264

Certain imputations concerning bias, bias against police, anger and bitterness affecting judgment, incompetence as a magistrate, and undermining the judicial system were sufficiently capable, defamatory, or distinct to go to the jury, subject to amendment where required. Other imputations were not pressed or were not sustainable in their pleaded form, but the plaintiff was given liberty to re-plead several of them. Although some imputations survived, the plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendant's costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 April 2001
Procedural Posture
Defamation Action / Argument Concerning Capacity and Form of Pleaded Imputations
Outcome
Plaintiff granted leave to amend or re-plead some imputations; some imputations to go to the jury; others not to go to the jury; plaintiff to pay defendant's costs.
Legal Topics
['capacity of Imputations' 'pleading Imputations' 'defamatory Meaning']
['defamation'] ['capacity of Imputations' 'pleading Imputations' 'defamatory Meaning']

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 Action / Argument Concerning Capacity and Form of Pleaded Imputations

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff's pleaded imputations were capable of arising from the publication and capable of being defamatory." 'Whether certain imputations were too general, abstract, confusing, or did not differ in substance from other imputations.' 'Whether the plaintiff should have leave to amend or re-plead particular imputations.']

Ratio Decidendi

Certain imputations concerning bias, bias against police, anger and bitterness affecting judgment, incompetence as a magistrate, and undermining the judicial system were sufficiently capable, defamatory, or distinct to go to the jury, subject to amendment where required. Other imputations were not pressed or were not sustainable in their pleaded form, but the plaintiff was given liberty to re-plead several of them. Although some imputations survived, the plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendant's costs.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff granted leave to amend or re-plead some imputations; some imputations to go to the jury; others not to go to the jury; plaintiff to pay defendant's costs.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiff has leave to amend imputations 4(a), (d) and (i) which, once amended, should go to the jury.' 'Imputations 4(b) and (k) should go to the jury.' 'Imputations 4(c), (j) and (l) should not go to the jury.' 'Imputations 4(e), (f), (g) and (h) should not go to the jury in their present form. The plaintiff...