Liristis v Malhotra [2009] NSWSC 1234

Liristis v Malhotra [2009] NSWSC 1234

There was no serious question to be tried that the plaintiff would be entitled to injunctive relief at a final hearing as distinct from damages, and courts are reluctant to grant injunctions restraining publication of defamatory statements, especially absent hearing from the defendants.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ex Parte Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['injunctions' 'defamatory Statements on Websites' 'ex Parte Applications' 'balance of Convenience' 'adequacy of Damages']
['defamation' 'equity'] ['injunctions' 'defamatory Statements on Websites' 'ex Parte Applications' 'balance of Convenience' 'adequacy of 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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ex Parte Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an interlocutory injunction should be granted to restrain publication of alleged defamatory statements' 'Whether there is a serious question to be tried justifying injunctive relief as opposed to damages']

Ratio Decidendi

There was no serious question to be tried that the plaintiff would be entitled to injunctive relief at a final hearing as distinct from damages, and courts are reluctant to grant injunctions restraining publication of defamatory statements, especially absent hearing from the defendants.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['Relief sought in the notice of motion refused']