SELLMAN & ORS v SLATER & ORS [2017] NZHC 2392

SELLMAN & ORS v SLATER & ORS [2017] NZHC 2392

The Court held that New Zealand follows the multiple publication rule for internet blogs so the pleaded causes were not time-barred; the presumption of reputational harm on publication remains but is rebuttable and an action will fail if defendant proves harm was less than minor (threshold more than minor); many pleaded meanings were capable of defamatory meaning and the bulk of strike-out applications failed; the procurement/accessory claim against Rich and NZFGC was not self-evidently speculative and procuring publication can found liability, so that claim stands; strike-out relief granted only as to specific pleaded meanings set out in the annex (21 of 161 meanings struck out).

Citation
[2017] NZHC 2392
Parties
First Plaintiff: John Douglas Sellman; Second Plaintiff: Boyd Anthony Swinburn; Third Plaintiff: Shane Kawenata Frederick Bradbrook; First Defendant: Cameron John Slater; Second Defendant: Carrick Douglas Montrose Graham; Third Defendant: Facilitate Communications Limited; Fourth Defendant: Katherine Rich; Fifth Defendant: New Zealand Food & Grocery Council Incorporated
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
2 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Interlocutory Strike Out Hearing and Judgment (pre Trial)
Outcome
Strike-out applications largely declined; proceeding to continue with amendments and interlocutory directions; 21 of 161 pleaded meanings struck out
Legal Topics
Multiple V Single Publication, Limitation Periods, Abuse of Process (jameel Principle), Defamatory Meaning, Procurement/accessorial Liability for Publication, Qualified Privilege, Rebuttable Presumption of Reputational Harm
Defamation Limitation Law Tort Law Procedural Law (strike Out/abuse of Process) Constitutional Rights (freedom of Expression) Multiple V Single Publication Limitation Periods Abuse of Process (jameel Principle) +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Douglas Sellman

First Plaintiff

Boyd Anthony Swinburn

Second Plaintiff

Shane Kawenata Frederick Bradbrook

Third Plaintiff

Cameron John Slater

First Defendant

Carrick Douglas Montrose Graham

Second Defendant

Facilitate Communications Limited

Third Defendant

Katherine Rich

Fourth Defendant

New Zealand Food & Grocery Council Incorporated

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Interlocutory Strike Out Hearing and Judgment (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Are causes of action time-barred (multiple v single publication)?
  2. 2 Is there a substantial or significant tort (Jameel/threshold of harm)?
  3. 3 Are the statements capable of defamatory meaning?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that New Zealand follows the multiple publication rule for internet blogs so the pleaded causes were not time-barred; the presumption of reputational harm on publication remains but is rebuttable and an action will fail if defendant proves harm was less than minor (threshold more than minor); many pleaded meanings were capable of defamatory meaning and the bulk of strike-out applications failed; the procurement/accessory claim against Rich and NZFGC was not self-evidently speculative and procuring publication can found liability, so that claim stands; strike-out relief granted only as to specific pleaded meanings set out in the annex (21 of 161 meanings struck out).

Court Disposition

Strike-out applications largely declined; proceeding to continue with amendments and interlocutory directions; 21 of 161 pleaded meanings struck out

Orders

  • Declined strike-out applications except as to the meanings identified in the annex where 21 pleaded meanings are struck out
  • Proceeding to continue to trial; parties ordered to file timetable applications and any further interlocutory applications as directed