Hrdavec v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2016] NSWDC 352

Hrdavec v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2016] NSWDC 352

Because the publication did more than merely report that the plaintiff had been charged, and placed that charge in the context of a headline announcing a co-accused's guilty plea, other alleged co-offenders being in custody or on bail, the plaintiff's photograph and caption, and reference to the maximum sentence for gang rape, it was reasonably capable at the capacity stage of conveying an imputation of guilt. The imputation of reasonable suspicion could only be pleaded as a fall-back. The charge imputation also genuinely differed in substance from suspicion and guilt in the unusual context of an alleged crime committed in company, but imputations (b) and (d) did not differ in substance...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation Proceeding / Application Pursuant to R 28.2 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw) in Relation to Capacity and R 14.30 in Relation to Form of Imputations
Outcome
Application determined by allowing amended imputations of guilt, fall-back suspicion, and being charged to proceed, striking out imputations (b) and (d), and making timetable and costs orders.
Legal Topics
['form and Capacity of Imputations' 'imputations of Guilt and Suspicion of Guilt' 'chase Level 1 and Level 2 Meanings' 'strike Out of Imputations']
['tort' 'defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['form and Capacity of Imputations' 'imputations of Guilt and Suspicion of Guilt' 'chase Level 1 and Level 2 Meanings' 'strike Out of Imputations']

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

Civil Defamation Proceeding / Application Pursuant to R 28.2 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw) in Relation to Capacity and R 14.30 in Relation to Form of Imputations

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the pleaded imputation that the plaintiff was guilty of gang raping a teenage girl at a Blacktown house party was reasonably capable of being conveyed by the publication.' 'Whether an imputation that the plaintiff was reasonably suspected by police of gang raping a teenage girl at a Blacktown house party should be pleaded as a fall-back imputation.' 'Whether the imputation that the plaintiff was charged with aggravated sexual assault in company, deprive liberty and aggravated indecent assault in company was reasonably capable of being conveyed and proper in form.' 'Whether imputations (b) and (d) differed in substance from other imputations or should be struck out.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the publication did more than merely report that the plaintiff had been charged, and placed that charge in the context of a headline announcing a co-accused's guilty plea, other alleged co-offenders being in custody or on bail, the plaintiff's photograph and caption, and reference to the maximum sentence for gang rape, it was reasonably capable at the capacity stage of conveying an imputation of guilt. The imputation of reasonable suspicion could only be pleaded as a fall-back. The charge imputation also genuinely differed in substance from suspicion and guilt in the unusual context of an alleged crime committed in company, but imputations (b) and (d) did not differ in substance...

Court Disposition

Application determined by allowing amended imputations of guilt, fall-back suspicion, and being charged to proceed, striking out imputations (b) and (d), and making timetable and costs orders.

Orders

  • ['Imputation (e) is reasonably capable of being conveyed when pleaded as follows "the plaintiff is guilty of gang raping a teenage girl at a Blacktown house party"; imputation (c) ("the plaintiff is reasonably suspected by the police of gang raping a teenage girl at a Blacktown house party") is to be pleaded as a...