Category Archives: Strike out application

Black is Back in Ontario: Breeden v Black [2012] SCC 19

The term “libel tourist” is a term bandied about by defamation defendants to suggest some sort of impropriety by a defamation plaintiff.  The point that publishers seem to make is this: where something is published all around the world, the … Continue reading

Posted in Publication, Strike out application | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Electric car case against Top Gear written off: Tesla Motors Ltd v BBC [2012] EWHC 310 (QB)

On 14 December 2008, Top Gear broadcast a show that featured an electric car made by the Claimants, a Roadster. Its body was similar to a Lotus Elise, a petrol powered car and the Top Gear episode showed a race … Continue reading

Posted in Defamatory meaning, imputations, Publication, Strike out application | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Copying the defendant’s imputations – Just not on: Waterhouse v The Age Company Ltd & Ors [2012] NSWSC 9

After the usual fight about imputations, the plaintiff’s amended statement of claim alleged that articles from The Age carried the following imputations about him: (a)     the plaintiff procured the murder of George Brown; OR (b)     the plaintiff was an accessory … Continue reading

Posted in contextual truth, imputations | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Appeal, appeal and appeal again: Sands v State of South Australia [2011] SASCFC 136

The plaintiff alleged that members of the SA Police Force, in the course of investigating a suspicious death, made statements that were defamatory of him, including statements that the plaintiff was suspected to have murdered the deceased. The deceased was … Continue reading

Posted in defences, Qualified privilege, Reciprocal duty-interest, Strike out application | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Kung Fu Fighting – plaintiff not as fast as lightning: Jin-Song Han v Australian Kung Fu Federation Inc [2011] VSC 498

This was an application to strike out 3 claims for defamation on the basis that they were statute barred. Under the Defamation Act 2005 (Vic), a person has 1 year from the date of publication to sue. If they do … Continue reading

Posted in Strike out application | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Cartoon Imputations Stand: Queensland Newspapers Pty Ltd v Palmer [2011] QCA 286

In a BRW 2002 edition, Ross Palmer was listed as being worth $180 million. On 10 June 2009, the Brisbane Courier-Mail published an article in its gossip column, “City Beat”. The article said this: “Downsized On a quiet day yesterday … Continue reading

Posted in Defamatory meaning, imputations, Strike out application | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Morrissey show can go on: Morrissey v McNicholas & IPC Media Ltd [2011] EWHC 2738

Stephen Morrissey is an English singer and songwriter, known simply as “Morrissey”. In the 1980s, he was the lead singer of “The Smiths” and since 1989 has had a successful career as a solo artist. The New Musical Express (NME) … Continue reading

Posted in News, Strike out application | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Statement of Claim Part VIII : Franchise Central (Australia) Pty Ltd & Ors v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2011] VSC 379

The plaintiffs provided consultancy services in relation to franchising. In January 2008, the defendants published an article in the BRW “From building to bail out”, and a further article in February 2008, “ASIC acts on franchise accusations”. The plaintiffs started … Continue reading

Posted in Defamatory meaning, imputations, News, Strike out application | Tagged | Leave a comment

Bloggers: Beware of the hyperlink: Ali v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2010] EWHC 100 (QB)

Azad Ali worked for the English Treasury and had a few blogs. One of the blogs was called “Defeating extremism by promoting balance” where he suggested that jihad was not terrorism. In January 2009, The Daily Mail published articles in … Continue reading

Posted in imputations, News, Strike out application, Truth | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The politician’s privilege?: Wookey v Quigley [2011] WASC 227

Since Lange in 1998, politicians have no longer been the cornerstones of the defamation lawyer’s practice. The High Court decided that we have an implied right in our constitution to discuss “government and political matter” and so politicians took their … Continue reading

Posted in defences, government and political matter, News, Qualified privilege, Reciprocal duty-interest, Strike out application | Tagged , | Leave a comment