McBride v John Fairfax Group Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 662

McBride v John Fairfax Group Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 662

Leave to amend was granted because the hearing date had been vacated and relisted, removing the prejudice that might otherwise have arisen from the lateness of the proposed amendments; the plaintiff had sufficient time to address the matters raised, and in the absence of prejudice the defendant was entitled to have a determination by the jury on any fairly arguable defence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure Application in Defamation Proceedings / Defendant's Notice of Motion for Leave to File an Amended Defence
Outcome
Leave granted to the defendant to file an amended defence; costs reserved on the motion.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Defence' 'substantial Truth' 'contextual Truth' 'prejudice From Late Amendment' 'dictates of Justice Under the Civil Procedure Act 2005']
['civil Procedure' 'defamation'] ['amendment of Defence' 'substantial Truth' 'contextual Truth' 'prejudice From Late Amendment' 'dictates of Justice Under the Civil Procedure Act 2005']

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 Procedure Application in Defamation Proceedings / Defendant's Notice of Motion for Leave to File an Amended Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant should be granted leave to file an amended defence raising substantial truth and providing additional particulars of contextual truth.' 'Whether the proposed late amendments would prejudice the plaintiff.' 'Whether the defendant was required to provide fuller particulars or an outline of evidence in support of the proposed amendments.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to amend was granted because the hearing date had been vacated and relisted, removing the prejudice that might otherwise have arisen from the lateness of the proposed amendments; the plaintiff had sufficient time to address the matters raised, and in the absence of prejudice the defendant was entitled to have a determination by the jury on any fairly arguable defence.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to the defendant to file an amended defence; costs reserved on the motion.

Orders

  • ["Grant leave to the defendant to file an amended defence in the form attached to the letter dated 17 April 2007 from Mallesons Stephen Jaques to Slater & Gordon and also as may be amended by incorporating in the defence the particulars of the defendant's contextual imputations." 'The amended defence is to be filed...