Bashford v Information Australia [2000] NSWSC 665

The claim was dismissed because the article was published on an occasion of common law qualified privilege and there was no evidence of malice; thus, the qualified privilege defence succeeded.

Parties: Plaintiff: Rex Bashford; Defendant: Information Australia (Newsletters) Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 12 July 2000
Procedural Posture: Defamation Proceedings / Judgment After Trial
Outcome: Dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics: Qualified Privilege, Substantial Truth, Damages, Aggravated Damages, Contextual Imputations, Malice

Tort Defamation Qualified Privilege Substantial Truth Damages Aggravated Damages Contextual Imputations Malice

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 6 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10

Parties

Rex Bashford

Plaintiff

Information Australia (Newsletters) Pty Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation Proceedings / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

1 Whether the plaintiff was defamed by the article in the Occupational Health and Safety Bulletin
2 Whether the circumstances of publication were such that the person defamed was not likely to suffer harm (Defamation Act 1974 s 13)
3 Whether the imputation was a matter of substantial truth (Defamation Act 1974 s 15)

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was dismissed because the article was published on an occasion of common law qualified privilege and there was no evidence of malice; thus, the qualified privilege defence succeeded.

Court Disposition

Dismissed with costs.

Orders

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.