Carolan v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (No 3) [2015] NSWSC 1344

Carolan v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (No 3) [2015] NSWSC 1344

Particular A(xii), concerning the reference to an organised crime figure, is capable of forming part of the basis for the opinion and is not so deficient as to warrant being struck out; the collective force of all twelve particulars supports the defence. The application was not raised at earlier procedural stages and, considering the particulars provided and subsequent discovery, further particularisation was adequate at this point. Thus, the challenge to both the particular and the subpoenas fails.

Parties
Plaintiff: Sean Carolan; First Defendant: Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: Peter FitzSimons
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Defences of Comment and Honest Opinion, Adequacy of Particulars, Truth, Interlocutory Procedures, Striking Out Particulars, Setting Aside Subpoenas
Defamation Defences of Comment and Honest Opinion Adequacy of Particulars Truth Interlocutory Procedures Striking Out Particulars Setting Aside Subpoenas

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

Sean Carolan

Plaintiff

Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Peter FitzSimons

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether particular A(xii) of the defence should be struck out
  2. 2 Whether subpoenas addressed to the New South Wales Police Force and Department of Customs and Border Protection should be set aside
  3. 3 Adequacy of particulars regarding 'organised crime figure'

Ratio Decidendi

Particular A(xii), concerning the reference to an organised crime figure, is capable of forming part of the basis for the opinion and is not so deficient as to warrant being struck out; the collective force of all twelve particulars supports the defence. The application was not raised at earlier procedural stages and, considering the particulars provided and subsequent discovery, further particularisation was adequate at this point. Thus, the challenge to both the particular and the subpoenas fails.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application to have particular A(xii) of the defence struck out is dismissed.
  • The application to have the subpoenas addressed to the New South Wales Police Force and the Department of Customs and Border Protection set aside is dismissed.