Konstantinidis v Foreign Media Pty Limited & Ors [2003] NSWSC 1135

Konstantinidis v Foreign Media Pty Limited & Ors [2003] NSWSC 1135

The first and second defendants had proper notice of the proceedings and, having given no explanation for non-appearance, the matter could proceed against them in their absence. The jury had found that the broadcasts conveyed serious defamatory imputations, including allegations of dishonesty, criminality and professional misconduct. Those imputations gravely attacked the plaintiff's integrity as a solicitor, caused serious hurt and reputational damage within the Greek community, and contributed to a downturn in his practice. The defendants' continued derogatory broadcasts after complaint, their sensational presentation of false allegations, and their continued reliance on truth without...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Assessment of Damages After Jury Findings Under S 7 a of the Defamation Act 1974
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against the first and second defendants.
Legal Topics
['assessment of Damages' 'aggravated Compensatory Damages' 'defamatory Radio Broadcasts' 'professional Reputation' 'ex Parte Hearing' 'interest on Damages']
['defamation'] ['assessment of Damages' 'aggravated Compensatory Damages' 'defamatory Radio Broadcasts' 'professional Reputation' 'ex Parte Hearing' 'interest on Damages']

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 Proceedings / Assessment of Damages After Jury Findings Under S 7 a of the Defamation Act 1974

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should proceed against the first and second defendants in their absence after notice of the hearing.' 'What damages should be awarded for the defamatory imputations conveyed by the broadcasts of 28 August 1996 and 29 August 1996.' "Whether aggravated compensatory damages were warranted by the defendants' conduct after complaint and during the litigation." 'Whether interest should be awarded on the damages from publication until verdict.']

Ratio Decidendi

The first and second defendants had proper notice of the proceedings and, having given no explanation for non-appearance, the matter could proceed against them in their absence. The jury had found that the broadcasts conveyed serious defamatory imputations, including allegations of dishonesty, criminality and professional misconduct. Those imputations gravely attacked the plaintiff's integrity as a solicitor, caused serious hurt and reputational damage within the Greek community, and contributed to a downturn in his practice. The defendants' continued derogatory broadcasts after complaint, their sensational presentation of false allegations, and their continued reliance on truth without...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the first and second defendants.

Orders

  • ['Proceedings against the fourth defendant were adjourned, with consequential orders for the further conduct of the matter as against that defendant.' 'Damages for the two broadcasts on 28 August 1996 assessed at $200,000 against the first defendant only.' 'Damages for the broadcast on 29 August 1996 assessed at...