YZ v Amazon (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 415

YZ v Amazon (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 415

It was premature to foreclose the plaintiff's defamation action because her involvement in criminal and Family Court proceedings explained the delay, she had not been able to obtain legal representation, the claim could be pleaded by a lawyer with defamation expertise, and the alleged electronic book publication was at least capable of conveying defamatory imputations, although defensibility remained a critical issue.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings; Interlocutory Applications / Consideration Whether the Plaintiff Should Have a Further Opportunity to Amend the Struck Out Statement of Claim or Whether the Proceedings Should Be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute With Due Dispatch
Outcome
Plaintiff referred to the Registrar for referral to a barrister or solicitor on the pro bono panel for legal assistance in settling an amended statement of claim.
Legal Topics
['self Represented Litigant' 'amended Statement of Claim' 'striking Out Embarrassing Pleading' 'want of Due Dispatch' 'pro Bono Referral']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['self Represented Litigant' 'amended Statement of Claim' 'striking Out Embarrassing Pleading' 'want of Due Dispatch' 'pro Bono Referral']

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; Interlocutory Applications / Consideration Whether the Plaintiff Should Have a Further Opportunity to Amend the Struck Out Statement of Claim or Whether the Proceedings Should Be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute With Due Dispatch

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should have a further opportunity to amend the statement of claim after failing to serve an amended pleading within the time previously ordered.' 'Whether the proceedings should be dismissed for failure to prosecute the claim with due dispatch.' "Whether the plaintiff should be referred under the court's pro bono scheme for assistance in settling an amended statement of claim."]

Ratio Decidendi

It was premature to foreclose the plaintiff's defamation action because her involvement in criminal and Family Court proceedings explained the delay, she had not been able to obtain legal representation, the claim could be pleaded by a lawyer with defamation expertise, and the alleged electronic book publication was at least capable of conveying defamatory imputations, although defensibility remained a critical issue.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff referred to the Registrar for referral to a barrister or solicitor on the pro bono panel for legal assistance in settling an amended statement of claim.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to rule 7.36 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules the plaintiff is referred to the Registrar for referral to a barrister or solicitor on the pro bono panel for legal assistance in settling an amended statement of claim.' 'The plaintiff is directed to serve an amended statement of claim within seven weeks...