Bass v TCN Channel Nine Pty Limited [2000] NSWSC 270

Bass v TCN Channel Nine Pty Limited [2000] NSWSC 270

The matter complained of was not capable of carrying the imputation that the plaintiff was a cheat, and any such imputation would in any event be a rhetorical repetition of more precise imputations. The words used were capable of supporting an imputation that the plaintiff was a shonky operator, and any imprecision flowed from the defendant's own language. Imputation (b) did not differ in substance from imputations (f) or (g), and imputation (e) was a rhetorical flourish because its substance was already covered by imputations alleging dishonesty and failure to pay employees. The material was capable of conveying imputations (c), (d), (f) and (g).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 April 2000
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Ruling on Defendant's Objections to the Capacity of Pleaded Imputations in a Further Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Imputation (a) struck out with leave to re-plead; judgment entered for the defendant on imputations (b) and (e); imputations (c), (d), (f) and (g) ruled capable of being conveyed.
Legal Topics
['imputations' 'capacity' 'rhetorical Imputations' 'pleading']
['defamation'] ['imputations' 'capacity' 'rhetorical Imputations' 'pleading']

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 / Ruling on Defendant's Objections to the Capacity of Pleaded Imputations in a Further Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the matter complained of was capable of conveying the imputation that the plaintiff was a cheat.' 'Whether the plaintiff should have leave to plead the alternative imputation that he was a shonky operator.' 'Whether imputations concerning preventing employees obtaining entitlements, deliberately failing to pay employees, and not being reliable to pay employees differed in substance.' 'Whether the imputation that the plaintiff was unfit to work as a building contractor was a rhetorical imputation.']

Ratio Decidendi

The matter complained of was not capable of carrying the imputation that the plaintiff was a cheat, and any such imputation would in any event be a rhetorical repetition of more precise imputations. The words used were capable of supporting an imputation that the plaintiff was a shonky operator, and any imprecision flowed from the defendant's own language. Imputation (b) did not differ in substance from imputations (f) or (g), and imputation (e) was a rhetorical flourish because its substance was already covered by imputations alleging dishonesty and failure to pay employees. The material was capable of conveying imputations (c), (d), (f) and (g).

Court Disposition

Imputation (a) struck out with leave to re-plead; judgment entered for the defendant on imputations (b) and (e); imputations (c), (d), (f) and (g) ruled capable of being conveyed.

Orders

  • ["Imputation (a) be struck out with leave to re-plead in the form 'that the plaintiff was a shonky operator'." 'Judgment for the defendant on imputations (b) and (e).' 'The material complained of is capable of conveying imputations (c), (d), (f) and (g) in their current form.' 'Within 7 days, the plaintiff file and...