Legal Research
Cases
Bailey v Win Television NSW Pty Ltd

Bailey v Win Television NSW Pty Ltd

Case [2020] NSWCA 352 22 December 2020

Appeal

Damages

Duty of Care

Statutory Construction

Negligence & Tort

Type to search within this case.

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 352
Hearing dates: 21 September 2020
Date of orders: 22 December 2020
Decision date: 22 December 2020
Before: Meagher JA at [1];
White JA at [5];
Simpson AJA at [16]
Decision:
1. To the extent necessary, leave to appeal is granted;
2. The appeal is dismissed;
3. The appellant is to pay the respondents’ costs of the appeal.

Catchwords:
DEFAMATION – defamatory matter – where news report on termination of General Manager of Council – where report referred to allegations of bullying and intimidation – whether imputation conveyed that General Manager bullied and intimidated staff
DEFAMATION – defences – statutory qualified privilege – reasonableness – relevance of propositions stated in Morgan v John Fairfax Ltd [No 2] (1991) 23 NSWLR 374

Legislation Cited:
Defamation Act 1958 (NSW)
Defamation Act 1974 (NSW)
Defamation Act 2005 (NSW)
Defamation Amendment Act 2002 (NSW)
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
Adam v Ward [1917] AC 309
Aktas v Westpac Banking Corporation (2010) 241 CLR 79; [2010] HCA 35
Austin v Mirror Newspapers Ltd (1985) 3 NSWLR 354
Barbaro v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Ltd (1990) 20 NSWLR 493
Braddock v Bevins [1948] 1 KB 580
Capital and Counties Bank Ltd v Henty & Sons (1882) 7 App Cas. 741
Cummings v Fairfax Digital Australia & New Zealand Pty Ltd (2018) 99 NSWLR 173; [2018] NSWCA 325
Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22
John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd v Zunter [2006] NSWCA 227
Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520; [1997] HCA 25
Lee v Lee; Hsu v RACQ Insurance Limited; Lee v RACQ Insurance Limited [2019] HCA 28
Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1963] 1 QB 340
Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1964] AC 234
Marshall v Megna [2013] NSWCA 30
Morgan v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd (1990) 20 NSWLR 511
Morgan v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd [No 2] (1991) 23 NSWLR 374
Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Rush [2020] FCAFC 115
Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton (2009) 238 CLR 460; [2009] HCA 16
Roberts v Bass (2002) 212 CLR 1; [2002] HCA 57
Robinson Helicopter Company Incorporated v McDermott [2016] HCA 22
Rush v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 7) [2019] FCA 496
Stoltenberg v Bolton; Loder v Bolton [2020] NSWCA 45
Toogood v Spyring [1834] Eng R 363; (1834) 1 Cr MR 181; 149 ER 1044
Warren v Coombes (1979) 142 CLR 531; [1979] HCA 9

Texts Cited:
New South Wales, Parliamentary Debates, Legislative Council, 5 December 2002 at 7774.

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Roger Bailey (Appellant)
WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd (1st Respondent)
WIN Corporation Pty Limited (2nd Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
D R Sibtain/L Barnett (Appellant)
S T Chrysanthou SC/B Dean (Respondents)
Solicitors:
Mills Oakley (Appellant)
Banki Haddock Fiora (Respondents)

File Number(s): 2020/113927
Decision…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Bailey v Win Television NSW Pty Ltd

Details

AGLC: Bailey v Win Television NSW Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 352
Case: [2020] NSWCA 352
Decision Date: 22 December 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Bailey, the former General Manager of a local council, appealed a decision of the primary judge concerning a defamation claim against Win Television NSW Pty Ltd. The dispute arose from a television news report that referred to allegations of bullying and intimidation made against Bailey in connection with his termination from the council. Bailey contended that the report conveyed imputations that he had bullied and intimidated staff.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the television report, in its context, conveyed the imputation that Bailey had bullied and intimidated staff. A secondary issue, arising in the context of the defence of statutory qualified privilege, concerned the application of the reasonableness test as established in *Morgan v John Fairfax Ltd [No 2]*.

The Court of Appeal, comprising Meagher and White JJA and Simpson AJA, found that the primary judge had correctly determined that the television report did not convey the imputation that Bailey had bullied and intimidated staff. The court reasoned that the report accurately reflected the subject matter of the council's investigation and the reasons for Bailey's termination, without asserting the truth of the allegations of bullying and intimidation as fact. The court also considered the defence of statutory qualified privilege, applying the principles of reasonableness from *Morgan v John Fairfax Ltd [No 2]*, and found it was not established.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, granting leave to appeal only to the extent necessary. The appellant, Bailey, was ordered to pay the respondents’ costs of the appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. To the extent necessary, leave to appeal is granted;

2. The appeal is dismissed;

3. The appellant is to pay the respondents’ costs of the appeal.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Bailey v Win Television NSW Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 352

Most Recent Citation

O'Brien v Bielecki [2021] VCC 813

Cases citing this decision · 8 of 8 shown

Munro v Wheeler (No 3)
[2025] NSWDC 3

…[2010] NSWSC 1412 Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Obeid (2006) 66 NSWLR 605 Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd (2020) 104 NSWLR 541; [2020] NSWCA 352 Banque Commerciale SA En Liquidation v Akhil Holdings Limited (1990) 169 CLR 279 Bashford v Information Australia (Newsletters) Pty Ltd (2004) 218 CLR 366; [20…
Bill Karageozis as trustee for the bankrupt estate of Siobhan Lamb v Sherman
[2023] QCA 258

…defence Defamation Act 2005 (Qld), s 33 Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd (2020) 104 NSWLR 541; [2020] NSWCA 352, cited Bashford v Information Australia (Newsletters) Pty Ltd (2004) 218 CLR 366; [2004] HCA 5, considered Bazzi v Dutton (2022) 289 FCR 1; [2022] FCAFC 84, cited Cush v Dillon (2011) 243 CLR 298; [201…
Duma v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (No 3)
[2023] FCA 47

…32 Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Waterhouse (1991) 25 NSWLR 519 Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd (2020) 104 NSWLR 541 Banque Commercial SA, En Liquidation v Akhil Holdings Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 279 Barbaro v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Ltd (1985) 1 NSWLR 30 Bazzi v Dutton [2022] FCAFC 84; 402 ALR 219 Be…
Massoud v Nationwide News Pty Ltd; Massoud v Fox Sports Australia Pty Ltd
[2022] NSWCA 150 Para 67

…to would in any event need to be assessed against what was held as a matter of ratio in Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd (2020) 104 NSWLR 541; [2020] NSWCA 352 (a decision to which the Victorian Court of Appeal may not have been referred, consistently with their Honours’ acknowledgement that they had not heard f…
Bazzi v Dutton
[2022] FCAFC 84 Para 22

…and Bampton JJ, Lesses v Maras (2017) 128 SASR 292 at 305–306 [70]–[72] per Blue, Parker and Hinton JJ and Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd (2020) 104 NSWLR 541 at 550–551 [43]–[50] per Simpson AJA with whom Meagher JA agreed (and, White JA appears to have applied the same approach, albeit he arrived at the opposit…
O'Brien v Bielecki
[2021] VCC 813

…ege - triviality Legislation Cited: Defamation Act 2005 (Vic) Cases Cited: Jones v Skelton [1963] 1 WLR 1362; Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 352; Murray v Raynor [2019] NSWCA 274; Marshall v Megna; Megna v Tory; Tory v Megna [2013] NSWCA 30 Judgment: Proceeding dismissed.…
High Court Bulletin
[2021] HCAB 4

…[2020] NSWCA 352…
Leyonhjelm v Hanson-Young
[2021] FCAFC 22

…Commonwealth of Australia (1988) 19 FCR 223 Austin v Mirror Newspapers Ltd [1986] AC 299 Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 352 Baird v Wallace-James (1916) 85 LJ PC 193 Banditt v The Queen (2005) 224 CLR 262 Barbaro v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Ltd (1985) 1 NSWLR 30 Bashford v Information A…

View all 8 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 27 of 27 shown

Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Rush
[2020] FCAFC 115 Para 50

…There was no suggestion of error in this collection of principles on appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court: Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Rush [2020] FCAFC 115. They were adopted by the primary judge at [19].…
Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd
[2020] NSWSC 232 Para 17

…e course of the trial. On 24 March 2020 the primary judge gave judgment for the first and second respondents: Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd [2020] NSWSC 232 (“the primary judgment”) and ordered Mr Bailey to pay the costs of the proceedings.…
Stoltenberg v Bolton
[2020] NSWCA 45 Para 127

…The Morgan [No 2] propositions remain relevant considerations. In Stoltenberg v Bolton; Loder v Bolton [2020] NSWCA 45, following Cummings v Fairfax Digital Australia & New Zealand Pty Ltd (2018) 99 NSWLR 173; [2018] NSWCA 325, this Court held that the jurisprudence developed in the context of s 22(1) of the 1974…
Lee v Lee
[2019] HCA 28

…Company Incorporated v McDermott [2016] HCA 22; (2016) 98 ALJR 679 considered. Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22; and Lee v Lee (2019) 266 CLR 129; [2019] HCA 28 applied. 2. Per Simpson AJA, Meagher JA agreeing : Viewed as a whole, the news report conveyed the imputation that the appellant bullied and i…
Rush v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 7)
[2019] FCA 496 Para 49

…in Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1964] AC 234 at 259, and repeatedly adopted in this State and in Australia. In Rush v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 7) [2019] FCA 496 Wigney J, after a review of relevant decisions, extracted 14 “basic principles” to be applied in determining whether an imputation pleaded is conveye…
Cummings v Fairfax Digital Australia & New Zealand Pty Ltd; Cummings v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd
[2018] NSWCA 325 Para 127

…s. In Stoltenberg v Bolton; Loder v Bolton [2020] NSWCA 45, following Cummings v Fairfax Digital Australia & New Zealand Pty Ltd (2018) 99 NSWLR 173; [2018] NSWCA 325, this Court held that the jurisprudence developed in the context of s 22(1) of the 1974 Act has continued relevance. In Stoltenberg , Gleeson JA (wit…
Robinson Helicopter Co Inc v McDermott
[2016] HCA 22

…the primary judge to make the assessment: at [1], [43]-[46]. Robinson Helicopter Company Incorporated v McDermott [2016] HCA 22; (2016) 98 ALJR 679 considered. Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22; and Lee v Lee (2019) 266 CLR 129; [2019] HCA 28 applied. 2. Per Simpson AJA, Meagher JA agreeing : Viewed as a…
Marshall v Megna
[2013] NSWCA 30 Para 67

…181; 149 ER 1044; Adam v Ward [1917] AC 309; Braddock v Bevins [1948] 1 KB 580. The common law defence survives: Defamation Act s 6; Marshall v Megna [2013] NSWCA 30.…
Aktas v Westpac Banking Corporation Ltd (No 2)
[2010] HCA 47 Para 68

…the occasion. The defence is defeated by proof that the communication was actuated by malice: see, for a recent general encapsulation of the defence, Aktas v Westpac Banking Corporation (2010) 241 CLR 79; [2010] HCA 35 (for example, at [14], [56]). Because of the requirement of reciprocity the defence has rarely been available to mass media…
Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton
[2009] HCA 16 Para 48

…eference to what “ordinary reasonable people” would understand the publication to mean: Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton (2009) 238 CLR 460; [2009] HCA 16 at [6]. “Ordinary reasonable people” are people “of ordinary intelligence, experience, and education”, are not “avid for scandal” and are fair minded. Th…
John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd v Zunter
[2006] NSWCA 227 Para 89

…ication (including any information that may be provided by individuals the subject of the publication: John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd v Zunter [2006] NSWCA 227).…
Fox v Percy
[2003] HCA 22 Para 43

…testimony”, are “glaringly improbable” or “contrary to compelling inferences”. These tests were stated in Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22 as illustrative of the potential bases on which a trial judge’s findings of fact might be disturbed: see [26], [28] – [29]. They solidified into requirements in…
Roberts v Bass
[2002] HCA 57 Para 76

…ernment and political affairs, which requires that the conduct of the publisher be reasonable in the circumstances ( Roberts v Bass (2002) 212 CLR 1; [2002] HCA 57 at [5]). The Court held:…
Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation
[1997] HCA 25 Para 76

…In Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520; [1997] HCA 25 the High Court had under consideration a then novel non-statutory defence which may be termed constitutional freedom of communication relating to government and political affairs, which requires that the conduct of the publisher be…
Morgan v John Fairfax & Sons Limited
[1991] HCATrans 51

…aph Ltd [1963] 1 QB 340 Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1964] AC 234 Marshall v Megna [2013] NSWCA 30 Morgan v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd (1990) 20 NSWLR 511 Morgan v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd [No 2] (1991) 23 NSWLR 374 Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Rush [2020] FCAFC 115 Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton (2009) 238 CLR 460; […
Barbaro v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited
[1989] HCATrans 311 Para 75

…In Barbaro v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Ltd (1990) 20 NSWLR 493 Samuels JA, with whom Hope AP and Priestley JA agreed, rejected (at 500F) an argument that s 22(1)(c) “demanded” proof of honest belief on the part of the publisher in the truth of what was published, adding that, while honest belief will often b…
Warren v Coombes
[1979] HCA 9 Para 46

…d by the trial judge”. This Court is in as good a position as the trial judge to make the assessment: Warren v Coombes (1979) 142 CLR 531 at 551; [1979] HCA 9.…
Pollock v The Queen
[2010] HCA 35 Para 68

…communication was actuated by malice: see, for a recent general encapsulation of the defence, Aktas v Westpac Banking Corporation (2010) 241 CLR 79; [2010] HCA 35 (for example, at [14], [56]). Because of the requirement of reciprocity the defence has rarely been available to mass media publications ( Aktas , at…
Lee v RACQ Insurance Limited
[2019] HCA 284 Para 45

…More recently, in Lee v Lee; Hsu v RACQ Insurance Limited; Lee v RACQ Insurance Limited (2019) 266 CLR 129; [2019] HCA 28 the High Court confirmed that the restrained approach described in Fox and referred to in Robinson Helicopters is as to factual findings likely to have been affected by impressions formed by the trial judge about…
[1964] AC 234
[1964] AC 234 Para 12

…important to stress that the word used in the broadcast was “allegations”. The oft quoted dicta of Lord Devlin in Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1964] AC 234 that “[a] man who wants to talk at large about smoke may have to pick his words very carefully if he wants to exclude the suggestion that there is also a fir…
[1917] AC 309
[1917] AC 309 Para 67

…has had a troubled history. It began life as a common law doctrine: Toogood v Spyring [1834] Eng R 363; (1834) 1 CM & R 181; 149 ER 1044; Adam v Ward [1917] AC 309; Braddock v Bevins [1948] 1 KB 580. The common law defence survives: Defamation Act s 6; Marshall v Megna [2013] NSWCA 30.…
Parke B had said in Toogood v Spyring
149 ER 1044 Para 67

…e of qualified privilege has had a troubled history. It began life as a common law doctrine: Toogood v Spyring [1834] Eng R 363; (1834) 1 CM & R 181; 149 ER 1044; Adam v Ward [1917] AC 309; Braddock v Bevins [1948] 1 KB 580. The common law defence survives: Defamation Act s 6; Marshall v Megna [2013] NSWCA 30.…
[1948] 1 KB 580
[1948] 1 KB 580 Para 67

…gan life as a common law doctrine: Toogood v Spyring [1834] Eng R 363; (1834) 1 CM & R 181; 149 ER 1044; Adam v Ward [1917] AC 309; Braddock v Bevins [1948] 1 KB 580. The common law defence survives: Defamation Act s 6; Marshall v Megna [2013] NSWCA 30.…
[1963] 1 QB 340
[1963] 1 QB 340 Para 14

…The above conclusion is in part informed by the nature of the broadcast. As Holroyd Pearce LJ remarked in Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1963] 1 QB 340 at 374 “when words with a precise and well-known meaning are used without addition of any expression which could impart some other flavour to them, it is not fair to…
Austin v Mirror Newspapers Ltd
(1958) AC 299 Para 71

…Although s 22 “was clearly intended to widen the scope of the common law defence of qualified privilege”: ( Austin v Mirror Newspapers Ltd (1985) 3 NSWLR 354 at 359E (Privy Council)), it provided no guidance as to how the reasonableness of the conduct of a publisher was to be determined. In Austin, with respect to a…
Capital & Counties Bank Ltd v Henty & Sons
(1982) 7 App Cas 741 Para 49

…The test so stated derives from Capital and Counties Bank Ltd v Henty & Sons (1882) 7 App Cas. 741 at 745, cited in Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1964] AC 234 at 259, and repeatedly adopted in this State and in Australia. In Rush v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 7) [2019] FCA 496 Wigney J, after a review of relevant decisions, extracted 14 “basic princi…
UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton
105 ER 536 Para 48

…conveyed by a publication is to be determined by reference to what “ordinary reasonable people” would understand the publication to mean: Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton (2009) 238 CLR 460; [2009] HCA 16 at [6]. “Ordinary reasonable people” are people “of ordinary intelligence, experience, and education”, are not “avid for scand…

Legislation cited in this decision · 6

Defamation Act 2005 (TAS)
30 2 mentions (from Para 4)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
51.36(2)) 2 mentions (from Para 108)
Defamation Act 1958 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 70)
Defamation Act 1974 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 69)
Defamation Amendment Act 2002 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 80)
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 18)

Medium Neutral Citation:	Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 352
Hearing dates:	21 September 2020
Date of orders:	22 December 2020
Decision date:	22 December 2020
Before:	Meagher JA at [1]; White JA at [5]; Simpson AJA at [16]
Decision:	1. To the extent necessary, leave to appeal is granted; 2. The appeal is dismissed; 3. The appellant is to pay the respondents’ costs of the appeal.
Catchwords:	DEFAMATION – defamatory matter – where news report on termination of General Manager of Council – where report referred to allegations of bullying and intimidation – whether imputation conveyed that General Manager bullied and intimidated staff DEFAMATION – defences – statutory qualified privilege – reasonableness – relevance of propositions stated in Morgan v John Fairfax Ltd [No 2] (1991) 23 NSWLR 374
Legislation Cited:	Defamation Act 1958 (NSW) Defamation Act 1974 (NSW) Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) Defamation Amendment Act 2002 (NSW) Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	Adam v Ward [1917] AC 309 Aktas v Westpac Banking Corporation (2010) 241 CLR 79; [2010] HCA 35 Austin v Mirror Newspapers Ltd (1985) 3 NSWLR 354 Barbaro v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Ltd (1990) 20 NSWLR 493 Braddock v Bevins [1948] 1 KB 580 Capital and Counties Bank Ltd v Henty & Sons (1882) 7 App Cas. 741 Cummings v Fairfax Digital Australia & New Zealand Pty Ltd (2018) 99 NSWLR 173; [2018] NSWCA 325 Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22 John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd v Zunter [2006] NSWCA 227 Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520; [1997] HCA 25 Lee v Lee; Hsu v RACQ Insurance Limited; Lee v RACQ Insurance Limited [2019] HCA 28 Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1963] 1 QB 340 Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1964] AC 234 Marshall v Megna [2013] NSWCA 30 Morgan v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd (1990) 20 NSWLR 511 Morgan v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd [No 2] (1991) 23 NSWLR 374 Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Rush [2020] FCAFC 115 Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton (2009) 238 CLR 460; [2009] HCA 16 Roberts v Bass (2002) 212 CLR 1; [2002] HCA 57 Robinson Helicopter Company Incorporated v McDermott [2016] HCA 22 Rush v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 7) [2019] FCA 496 Stoltenberg v Bolton; Loder v Bolton [2020] NSWCA 45 Toogood v Spyring [1834] Eng R 363; (1834) 1 Cr MR 181; 149 ER 1044 Warren v Coombes (1979) 142 CLR 531; [1979] HCA 9
Texts Cited:	New South Wales, Parliamentary Debates, Legislative Council, 5 December 2002 at 7774.
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Roger Bailey (Appellant) WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd (1st Respondent) WIN Corporation Pty Limited (2nd Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: D R Sibtain/L Barnett (Appellant) S T Chrysanthou SC/B Dean (Respondents) Solicitors: Mills Oakley (Appellant) Banki Haddock Fiora (Respondents)
File Number(s):	2020/113927
Decision…