New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Declaration under s24 defamation act 1992

Legal area

Court

16 Jun 2023

CURRIE v DOE [2023] NZHC 1508

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1508
Court

High Court

The Court was satisfied on affidavit evidence that the five online publications were published in New Zealand and were defamatory in their natural and ordinary meaning (except specific subparagraphs B6–B8), no viable defence was pleaded, prior limitation arguments had been rejected, and consequently a declaration under s24 Defamation Act 1992 was an appropriate remedy against the anonymous defendants named as John Doe and Jane Doe.
9 Oct 2020

FOURTH ESTATE HOLDINGS (2012) LTD v JOYCE [2020] NZCA 479

Citation

[2020] NZCA 479
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal held the two impugned passages, read in context by the reasonable reader, did not convey the defamatory imputations pleaded by the respondent nor the alternative meanings the High Court adopted; accordingly the High Court judgment was set aside and the respondent's claims failed; related claims based on the tweets also failed as they only could have succeeded if the article conveyed the defamatory imputations.
14 Jul 2017

MALTESE CAT LIMITED v DOE [2017] NZHC 1634

Citation

[2017] NZHC 1634
Court

High Court

The Court held that given the nature, volume and evidential quality of material filed by the second defendant and the issues raised the dispute is unsuitable for resolution under Part 18 originating summons procedure; the limitation point could not be resolved on the materials before the Court and required further argument; the matter was adjourned for parties to decide whether to convert to an ordinary action or to have a hearing on whether the Part 18 procedure should continue, with directions to set a timetable and further opportunity for Nottingham to give direct evidence.

New Zealand Case Law

CURRIE v DOE [2023] NZHC 1508

FOURTH ESTATE HOLDINGS (2012) LTD v JOYCE [2020] NZCA 479

MALTESE CAT LIMITED v DOE [2017] NZHC 1634