LEVER v MURRAY [1993] NSWCA 160

LEVER v MURRAY [1993] NSWCA 160

The evidence sought to be admitted was not capable of establishing the alleged imputations, and the ordinary reasonable reader would not interpret the statements as conveying the claimed defamatory meanings; there was no misdirection nor basis for a new trial.

Parties
Appellant: Samuel Lever; Respondent: Wallace Telford Murray
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 1993
Procedural Posture
Defamation Claim / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Identification, Imputation, Jury Directions
Defamation Identification Imputation Jury Directions

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel Lever

Appellant

Wallace Telford Murray

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Defamation Claim / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in not allowing certain identification evidence to go to the jury
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in withdrawing from the jury the imputation that the plaintiff was not worth regarding as a human being
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence sought to be admitted was not capable of establishing the alleged imputations, and the ordinary reasonable reader would not interpret the statements as conveying the claimed defamatory meanings; there was no misdirection nor basis for a new trial.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs