Cornish v Langenbach [2008] NSWDC 84

Cornish v Langenbach [2008] NSWDC 84

The Reply was not struck out because the particulars, viewed as a whole, included clearly relevant allegations of prior hostility and ill will and supplied a basis for lack of honest belief or improper motive, including the alleged invented conspiracy and reliance on 'public street knowledge'. Striking out a Reply is exceptional, and in any event it was premature to deal finally with the objections because the Statement of Claim, Defence and Reply required revision before the proceedings could be made ready for hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation Proceedings / Defendant's Application to Strike Out the Plaintiff's Reply
Outcome
Defendant's application to strike out the Plaintiff's Reply dismissed.
Legal Topics
['particularisation of Malice' 'qualified Privilege' 'strike Out Application' 'reply Pleading']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['particularisation of Malice' 'qualified Privilege' 'strike Out Application' 'reply Pleading']

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 Proceedings / Defendant's Application to Strike Out the Plaintiff's Reply

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Plaintiff's Reply should be struck out for inadequate particulars of malice." 'Whether the pleaded particulars of malice disclosed a reasonably arguable basis, including lack of honest belief, reckless indifference, lack of reasonable basis, prior hostility and ill will.' 'Whether it was premature to determine objections to the Reply where the Statement of Claim, Defence and Reply required revision.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Reply was not struck out because the particulars, viewed as a whole, included clearly relevant allegations of prior hostility and ill will and supplied a basis for lack of honest belief or improper motive, including the alleged invented conspiracy and reliance on 'public street knowledge'. Striking out a Reply is exceptional, and in any event it was premature to deal finally with the objections because the Statement of Claim, Defence and Reply required revision before the proceedings could be made ready for hearing.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application to strike out the Plaintiff's Reply dismissed.

Orders

  • ["Defendant's application to strike out the Plaintiff's Reply dismissed." 'Costs reserved.' 'Matter placed in Defamation List on 23 May 2008 at 9:00 am for further directions.' 'Liberty to apply re orders 2 and 3.']