Ahmed v Harbour Radio Pty Ltd (No 2)

The defendants, Harbour Radio Pty Ltd, brought an application to strike out certain parts of the plaintiff’s amended statement of claim. The plaintiff, Ahmed, had brought an action for defamation against the defendants, seeking damages for alleged defamatory imputations made by the defendants. The case was before the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The defendants argued that certain parts of the amended statement of claim were defective and should be struck out as they did not specify the defamatory meaning of the words alleged to be defamatory.

The court was required to determine whether the plaintiff had properly pleaded the defamatory imputations in the amended statement of claim. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the use of slang or colloquialisms in the pleadings was appropriate, and whether the plaintiff had sufficiently identified the defamatory meaning of the words. The court also had to consider whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to re-plead if certain parts of the amended statement of claim were struck out.

The court held that the plaintiff had not sufficiently identified the defamatory meaning of the words alleged to be defamatory. The court found that the use of slang or colloquialisms in the pleadings was not appropriate and that the plaintiff had not specified the defamatory meaning of the words. The court struck out the relevant parts of the amended statement of claim and granted the plaintiff leave to re-plead. The court held that the plaintiff should be given an opportunity to re-plead and properly identify the defamatory meaning of the words. The court did not make any final orders in this case, as the matter was to be re-pleaded.