Feldman v Australian Broadcasting Corporation [2017] NSWSC 359

Feldman v Australian Broadcasting Corporation [2017] NSWSC 359

The revised contextual imputations were reasonably capable of arising from the broadcast. Imputations B and C were not defective in form because each identified a defamatory attribution and then provided further particularity as to the sense in which the matter complained of attributed that conduct or condition to the plaintiff. Capacity was appropriately determined at the second listing. The plaintiff's application to strike out contextual imputations B and C was therefore refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Second Listing; Plaintiff's Application to Have Contextual Imputations Struck Out
Outcome
Plaintiff's application to have contextual imputations struck out refused.
Legal Topics
['pleadings' 'contextual Imputations' 'objection to Form of Imputations' 'capacity of Imputations']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['pleadings' 'contextual Imputations' 'objection to Form of Imputations' 'capacity 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

Defamation Proceedings / Second Listing; Plaintiff's Application to Have Contextual Imputations Struck Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether contextual imputations B and C should be struck out because their form combined a defamatory attribution with particulars so that the defamatory sting was unclear.' 'Whether the issue of capacity of the contextual imputations should be determined at the second listing or left for the trial judge.' 'Whether the matter complained of was reasonably capable of conveying the revised contextual imputations.']

Ratio Decidendi

The revised contextual imputations were reasonably capable of arising from the broadcast. Imputations B and C were not defective in form because each identified a defamatory attribution and then provided further particularity as to the sense in which the matter complained of attributed that conduct or condition to the plaintiff. Capacity was appropriately determined at the second listing. The plaintiff's application to strike out contextual imputations B and C was therefore refused.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application to have contextual imputations struck out refused.

Orders

  • ['The application to have contextual imputations B and C struck out is refused.' 'The defendant is directed to file and serve an amended defence within fourteen days.' 'The proceedings are stood over to 28 April 2017 for further second listing.']