Fierravanti-Wells v Nationwide News Pty Ltd & Anor [2010] NSWSC 648

Fierravanti-Wells v Nationwide News Pty Ltd & Anor [2010] NSWSC 648

The Court held that, although the first article was capable of conveying that the plaintiff rorted her study tour abroad and that her study trip to Italy was a farce, it was not capable of conveying the pleaded imputations of dishonesty, cheating, ripping off taxpayers, stupidity and unfitness for office, concealment, failure to provide a proper report, being a ridiculous politician, or achieving no useful result. The Court also held that the second article was not capable of conveying the pleaded imputations of deceptive pretence, dishonesty, cheating, causing a review of study tour rules, unfitness to be a senator because of abuse of entitlement, or neglecting taxpayers' interests, but...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Separate Trial of Issues Raised by the Defendants' Notice of Objection to Pleaded Imputations
Outcome
Defendants' objections were upheld in part; specified imputations were struck out and the plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings.
Legal Topics
['objections to Imputations' 'whether Imputations Were Reasonably Capable of Being Conveyed' 'form of Imputations' 'ucpr 14.30(2)(a)']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['objections to Imputations' 'whether Imputations Were Reasonably Capable of Being Conveyed' 'form of Imputations' 'ucpr 14.30(2)(a)']

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 / Separate Trial of Issues Raised by the Defendants' Notice of Objection to Pleaded Imputations

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the first article was reasonably capable of conveying each of the plaintiff's pleaded defamatory imputations" "Whether the second article was reasonably capable of conveying each of the plaintiff's pleaded defamatory imputations" 'Whether imputation d for the first article was bad in form because it was ambiguous, rhetorical, or failed to encapsulate an act or condition of the plaintiff' 'Whether imputation d for the second article was bad in form, ambiguous, or failed to capture a sting with adequate precision']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that, although the first article was capable of conveying that the plaintiff rorted her study tour abroad and that her study trip to Italy was a farce, it was not capable of conveying the pleaded imputations of dishonesty, cheating, ripping off taxpayers, stupidity and unfitness for office, concealment, failure to provide a proper report, being a ridiculous politician, or achieving no useful result. The Court also held that the second article was not capable of conveying the pleaded imputations of deceptive pretence, dishonesty, cheating, causing a review of study tour rules, unfitness to be a senator because of abuse of entitlement, or neglecting taxpayers' interests, but...

Court Disposition

Defendants' objections were upheld in part; specified imputations were struck out and the plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings.

Orders

  • ['In respect of the first article: Imputations b, c, e, f, g, h, i and j are struck out.' 'In respect of the second article: Imputations a, b, c, e, h and j are struck out.' "The plaintiff is to pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings."]