Doe 1 v Dowling [2018] NSWSC 1278

Doe 1 v Dowling [2018] NSWSC 1278

The amended defence disclosed no reasonable defence, was untenable, failed to plead or particularise the defences, provided no material to support the pleaded defences, and did not comply with the rules of pleading. Further, the litigation history indicated little prospect that leave to re-plead would result in a compliant or legitimate pleading. The defendant was not permitted to re-plead, and the application to strike out was granted.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Jane Doe 1; Second Plaintiff: Jane Doe 2; Third Plaintiff: Jane Doe 3; Fourth Plaintiff: Jane Doe 4; Defendant: Shane Dowling
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Interlocutory Application (strike Out Amended Defence)
Outcome
Amended defence struck out; defendant not permitted to re-plead; plaintiffs directed to bring in short minutes of order within 7 days; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Strike Out Application, Pleadings, Defences in Defamation, Absolute Privilege, Qualified Privilege, Truth, Triviality, Honest Opinion
Practice and Procedure Defamation Strike Out Application Pleadings Defences in Defamation Absolute Privilege Qualified Privilege Truth +2 more

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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jane Doe 1

First Plaintiff

Jane Doe 2

Second Plaintiff

Jane Doe 3

Third Plaintiff

Jane Doe 4

Fourth Plaintiff

Shane Dowling

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation Proceedings / Interlocutory Application (strike Out Amended Defence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amended defence discloses a reasonable defence
  2. 2 Whether the amended defence should be struck out pursuant to r 14.28 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
  3. 3 Whether defendant should be permitted to re-plead the defence

Ratio Decidendi

The amended defence disclosed no reasonable defence, was untenable, failed to plead or particularise the defences, provided no material to support the pleaded defences, and did not comply with the rules of pleading. Further, the litigation history indicated little prospect that leave to re-plead would result in a compliant or legitimate pleading. The defendant was not permitted to re-plead, and the application to strike out was granted.

Court Disposition

Amended defence struck out; defendant not permitted to re-plead; plaintiffs directed to bring in short minutes of order within 7 days; costs reserved.

Orders

  • The amended defence filed by the defendant be struck out.
  • The defendant not be granted leave to re-plead the defence.