Buckley v Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited (No 2) [2008] NSWDC 102

Buckley v Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited (No 2) [2008] NSWDC 102

Certain imputations arising from the first publication (4(a), (b), (c), and (e)) are capable of being conveyed to the ordinary reasonable reader as statements of fact or condition, not merely suspicion, and will go to the jury; imputations 4(d) and all pleaded imputations from the second publication (6(a)-(d)) only convey suspicion and are struck out with leave to plead imputations of suspicion if so advised. Objections to form as raised were generally dismissed except where the imputation was struck out on capacity grounds.

Parties
Plaintiff: Shane Buckley; First Defendant: Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited; Second Defendant: Joanne McCarthy
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application Determination of Imputations to Be Put to Jury and Striking Out of Others
Outcome
Imputations 4(a), (b), (c) and (e) to go to the jury. Imputations 4(d) and 6(a)-(d) struck out with leave to plead imputations of suspicion. Further amended statement of claim to be filed and served within 14 days. Costs of this argument to be the defendant's costs in the cause. Liberty to apply re costs.
Legal Topics
Imputations, Capacity, Form of Imputations, Suspicion Versus Guilt, Defamation Pleadings
Tort Defamation Imputations Capacity Form of Imputations Suspicion Versus Guilt Defamation Pleadings

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shane Buckley

Plaintiff

Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited

First Defendant

Joanne McCarthy

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application Determination of Imputations to Be Put to Jury and Striking Out of Others

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether particular imputations pleaded by the plaintiff are capable of arising from the published materials
  2. 2 Whether certain imputations should be struck out as only conveying suspicion or due to deficiencies in form

Ratio Decidendi

Certain imputations arising from the first publication (4(a), (b), (c), and (e)) are capable of being conveyed to the ordinary reasonable reader as statements of fact or condition, not merely suspicion, and will go to the jury; imputations 4(d) and all pleaded imputations from the second publication (6(a)-(d)) only convey suspicion and are struck out with leave to plead imputations of suspicion if so advised. Objections to form as raised were generally dismissed except where the imputation was struck out on capacity grounds.

Court Disposition

Imputations 4(a), (b), (c) and (e) to go to the jury. Imputations 4(d) and 6(a)-(d) struck out with leave to plead imputations of suspicion. Further amended statement of claim to be filed and served within 14 days. Costs of this argument to be the defendant's costs in the cause. Liberty to apply re costs.

Orders

  • Imputations 4(a), (b), (c) and (e) are to go to the jury.
  • Imputations 4(d) and 6 (a) – (d) are struck out with leave to plead imputations of suspicion.