Jones -v- Coolmore Stud [2017] IECA 164 (25 May 2017)

Jones -v- Coolmore Stud [2017] IECA 164 (25 May 2017)

It is lawful for a party apprehending defamation to notify distributors and booksellers of alleged defamatory material prior to a court determination, and such notification does not entitle the author to injunctive relief or a declaration of non-defamation. The defence of innocent publication under s.27 of the Defamation Act 2009 legitimises such conduct. Mr. Jones failed to establish a fair case to be tried, damages were an adequate remedy, and he was disentitled to equitable relief due to breach of agreement. Allegations of judicial bias were wholly unsubstantiated.

Citation
[2017] IECA 164
Parties
Appellant: William Jones; Respondent: Coolmore Stud
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
25 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Order
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Defamation, Innocent Publication, Confidentiality Agreements, Bias, Freedom of Expression, Adequacy of Damages
Defamation Contract Employment Equity Interlocutory Injunctions Innocent Publication Confidentiality Agreements Bias +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Jones

Appellant

Coolmore Stud

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Coolmore Stud was legally entitled to notify distributors and booksellers of alleged defamation prior to a court determination
  2. 2 Whether Mr. Jones was entitled to interlocutory injunctions restraining Coolmore from communicating with third parties
  3. 3 Whether the High Court erred in refusing a declaration that the book was not defamatory

Ratio Decidendi

It is lawful for a party apprehending defamation to notify distributors and booksellers of alleged defamatory material prior to a court determination, and such notification does not entitle the author to injunctive relief or a declaration of non-defamation. The defence of innocent publication under s.27 of the Defamation Act 2009 legitimises such conduct. Mr. Jones failed to establish a fair case to be tried, damages were an adequate remedy, and he was disentitled to equitable relief due to breach of agreement. Allegations of judicial bias were wholly unsubstantiated.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No interlocutory injunctions granted
  • No declaration of non-defamation