Alan Le Busque v ACP Publishing Pty Limited

The case of Alan Le Busque v ACP Publishing Pty Limited concerns a defamation claim brought by the plaintiff, Alan Le Busque, against the defendant, ACP Publishing Pty Limited, over allegedly defamatory content published in the defendant’s magazine, apcmag.com, in June 2003. The plaintiff sought damages for publication in various Australian jurisdictions, but the defendant argued that the claim was barred by limitation laws in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT). The defendant also applied to transfer the proceedings from the Supreme Court of the ACT to the Supreme Court of New South Wales under section 5(2) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1993 (ACT).

The legal issues before the court included whether the transfer of the proceedings to the Supreme Court of New South Wales was in the interests of justice, considering factors such as the availability of witnesses, the location of the parties' residences and businesses, and the procedural differences between the two jurisdictions. The court considered whether the plaintiff’s interest in vindicating his reputation in his “home town” of Canberra outweighed the defendant’s preference for a trial by jury, a procedural feature available in New South Wales but not in the ACT. The court also examined whether the procedural differences between the two jurisdictions warranted a transfer for more efficient resolution of the dispute.

In reaching its decision, the court noted that the plaintiff and potential witnesses resided in Canberra, while the defendant was based in Sydney. The court observed that the "connecting factors" such as convenience and expense were evenly balanced. The plaintiff’s argument that a judgment in Canberra would more effectively vindicate his reputation was deemed relevant to the interests of justice, although not determinative. The court also considered the defendant’s preference for a trial by jury in New South Wales but found no basis to assume that the legislative policy underlying this procedure should be preferred over that of the ACT. The court concluded that the matter was finely balanced but ultimately decided that the Supreme Court of New South Wales was not a more appropriate forum. Therefore, the application for transfer was dismissed.