Dank v Cronulla Sutherland District Rugby League Football Club Ltd [2014] NSWCA 288

Dank v Cronulla Sutherland District Rugby League Football Club Ltd [2014] NSWCA 288

No error of principle or material fact was shown in the exercise of the primary judge’s discretion in dismissing proceedings for want of due despatch, striking out embarrassing pleadings, restricting interrogatories, or the application of publication liability tests. Leave to appeal was refused as no substantial injustice or issue of public importance warranted appellate intervention.

Parties
Applicant: Stephen Dank; First Respondent: Cronulla Sutherland District Rugby League Football Club Ltd; Second Respondent: Phil Rothfield; Third Respondent: Damien Irvine
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Decisions
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; summons dismissed
Legal Topics
Striking Out of Pleadings, Leave to Appeal, Embarrassing Pleadings, Interrogatories, Joint Publication Liability, Failure to Prosecute With Due Despatch
Defamation Civil Procedure Striking Out of Pleadings Leave to Appeal Embarrassing Pleadings Interrogatories Joint Publication Liability Failure to Prosecute With Due Despatch

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 5 Authorities cited 37 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Dank

Applicant

Cronulla Sutherland District Rugby League Football Club Ltd

First Respondent

Phil Rothfield

Second Respondent

Damien Irvine

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Decisions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether primary judge erred in dismissing proceedings against defendants for want of due despatch and failure to bring pleadings into good order
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted where plaintiff had leave to re-plead at first instance
  3. 3 Whether interrogatories should have been permitted in applicant’s chosen form

Ratio Decidendi

No error of principle or material fact was shown in the exercise of the primary judge’s discretion in dismissing proceedings for want of due despatch, striking out embarrassing pleadings, restricting interrogatories, or the application of publication liability tests. Leave to appeal was refused as no substantial injustice or issue of public importance warranted appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; summons dismissed

Orders

  • Summons for leave to appeal dismissed
  • Applicant to pay the first and third respondents' costs of the summons for leave on the ordinary basis