Oueik v Seven West Media Limited [2017] NSWSC 1325

Oueik v Seven West Media Limited [2017] NSWSC 1325

The plaintiff's interrogatories 13 and 15 were irrelevant because the defendants did not plead truth of imputations 7(a) and 7(c), and what mattered for aggravated damages was the plaintiff's knowledge of the defendants' state of mind, not the defendants' subjective belief itself. The objection to the defence failed because legality under s 449 of the Local Government Act 1993 did not preclude a pleaded case that the plaintiff acted unethically, and the pleaded issue was capable of being determined by the final tribunal of fact. Discovery for categories 19 and 20 was suspended because the material was subject to non-disclosure orders and discovery was continuing. Defendants'...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceeding / Interlocutory Ruling on Interrogatories, Discovery and Objections to Defence
Outcome
Interlocutory orders made on interrogatories and discovery; objection to the defence rejected; costs to be costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['interrogatories' 'discovery' 'strike Out Pleading' 'justification' 'contextual Truth' 'aggravated Damages' 'non Disclosure Orders']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['interrogatories' 'discovery' 'strike Out Pleading' 'justification' 'contextual Truth' 'aggravated Damages' 'non Disclosure Orders']

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 Proceeding / Interlocutory Ruling on Interrogatories, Discovery and Objections to Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff's interrogatories about the first defendant's belief in pleaded imputations 7(a) and 7(c) should be allowed." 'Whether particulars of justification should be rejected or struck out where the pleaded imputation alleged unethical, rather than illegal, conduct.' 'Whether discovery categories concerning the Auburn Public Inquiry should be compelled despite non-disclosure orders.' "Whether the defendants' interrogatories objected to by the plaintiff were fishing, vexatious, unnecessary or otherwise improper."]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's interrogatories 13 and 15 were irrelevant because the defendants did not plead truth of imputations 7(a) and 7(c), and what mattered for aggravated damages was the plaintiff's knowledge of the defendants' state of mind, not the defendants' subjective belief itself. The objection to the defence failed because legality under s 449 of the Local Government Act 1993 did not preclude a pleaded case that the plaintiff acted unethically, and the pleaded issue was capable of being determined by the final tribunal of fact. Discovery for categories 19 and 20 was suspended because the material was subject to non-disclosure orders and discovery was continuing. Defendants'...

Court Disposition

Interlocutory orders made on interrogatories and discovery; objection to the defence rejected; costs to be costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff's interrogatories [13] and [15] are disallowed." "Order suspending the obligation for discovery of Categories [19] and [20] of the defendant's request, until such time as the non-disclosure orders are lifted by the Inquiry." 'The Court grants leave to re-agitate the issue if, a reasonable time before...