Lahoud v Hooper [2015] NSWSC 1026

Lahoud v Hooper [2015] NSWSC 1026

The plaintiff did not satisfy UCPR 5.2(1)(a) because, although he was unable to ascertain the source's identity, he had not made reasonable inquiries. He had only asked the defendant and had not asked, or caused his solicitors to ask, the two or three residents whom he suspected of being the source. Such inquiries were not shown to be futile. The precondition for preliminary discovery was therefore not established and the summons was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Preliminary Discovery to Ascertain a Prospective Defendant's Identity for Proposed Defamation Proceedings / Hearing of Summons
Outcome
Summons dismissed.
Legal Topics
['preliminary Discovery' "prospective Defendant's Identity" 'reasonable Inquiries' 'ucpr 5.2' 'qualified Privilege']
['practice and Procedure' 'defamation'] ['preliminary Discovery' "prospective Defendant's Identity" 'reasonable Inquiries' 'ucpr 5.2' 'qualified Privilege']

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

Application for Preliminary Discovery to Ascertain a Prospective Defendant's Identity for Proposed Defamation Proceedings / Hearing of Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff, having made reasonable inquiries, was unable to sufficiently ascertain the identity of the source for the purpose of commencing proceedings.' 'Whether the plaintiff had a genuinely held and objectively based desire to commence defamation proceedings against the source.' "Whether the Court's discretion should be exercised to make preliminary discovery orders."]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff did not satisfy UCPR 5.2(1)(a) because, although he was unable to ascertain the source's identity, he had not made reasonable inquiries. He had only asked the defendant and had not asked, or caused his solicitors to ask, the two or three residents whom he suspected of being the source. Such inquiries were not shown to be futile. The precondition for preliminary discovery was therefore not established and the summons was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Dismiss the summons.' "Unless an application is made to my Associate in writing within seven days hereof, order the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings."]