Greinert v Brooker [2018] NSWSC 1194

Greinert v Brooker [2018] NSWSC 1194

It is reasonably arguable that Channel 9 could be a concurrent tortfeasor liable in respect of the same damage as the defendants under s 5(1)(c); discretionary factors against granting leave are outweighed by the interests of the defendants and the dictates of justice require leave be granted.

Parties
Plaintiff: Robert Alexander Greinert; First Defendant: John William Brooker; Second Defendant: Benjamin Morgan; Proposed Cross Respondent: TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd; Proposed Cross Respondent: Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd; Proposed Cross Respondent: Nine Digital Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Application for Leave to File Cross Claim Late
Outcome
Leave granted to defendants to file cross-claim; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Republication and Damages, Contribution and Concurrent Tortfeasors, Discretionary Leave for Cross Claim
Defamation Civil Procedure Republication and Damages Contribution and Concurrent Tortfeasors Discretionary Leave for Cross Claim

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Alexander Greinert

Plaintiff

John William Brooker

First Defendant

Benjamin Morgan

Second Defendant

TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd

Proposed Cross Respondent

Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd

Proposed Cross Respondent

Nine Digital Pty Ltd

Proposed Cross Respondent

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Application for Leave to File Cross Claim Late

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Channel 9 is a concurrent tortfeasor liable in respect of the same damage for the purposes of s 5(1)(c) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1946 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether leave should be granted to defendants to file a cross-claim for contribution outside the usual time limits

Ratio Decidendi

It is reasonably arguable that Channel 9 could be a concurrent tortfeasor liable in respect of the same damage as the defendants under s 5(1)(c); discretionary factors against granting leave are outweighed by the interests of the defendants and the dictates of justice require leave be granted.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to defendants to file cross-claim; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the defendants to file a cross-claim in the form provided at tab 4 of the Court Book.
  • Costs of the argument are reserved.