Bauer Media Pty Ltd v Wilson (No 2)

SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

COURT OF APPEAL

S APCI 2017 0109

BAUER MEDIA PTY LTD (ACN 053 273 546) and BAUER MEDIA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 160 041 681)	Applicants
v
REBEL MELANIE ELIZABETH WILSON [No 2]		Respondent

---

JUDGES:	TATE, BEACH and ASHLEY JJA
WHERE HELD:	MELBOURNE
DATES OF HEARING:	18 and 19 April 2018
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	14 June 2018
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2018] VSCA 154
JUDGMENT APPEALED FROM:	[2017] VSC 521 (John Dixon J)

---

DEFAMATION – Appeal – Damages – Damages for non-economic loss – Aggravated damages – Publications seriously defamatory – Serious circumstances of aggravation – Multiple matters of aggravation – Judge’s assessment of non-economic loss damages of $650,000 – Successful challenge on appeal to some of judge’s findings of aggravation – Plaintiff’s damages for non-economic loss reassessed at $600,000.

DEFAMATION – Appeal – Damages – Statutory cap on damages for non-economic loss – Whether only the aggravated damages component of damages for non-economic loss may be awarded in a sum in excess of the maximum prescribed in s 35(1) – Whether statutory cap acts as cut-off – Whether statutory cap fixes top end of range of damages that may be awarded for non-economic loss – Defamation Act 2005 ss 34 and 35 – Judge’s construction that the cap can be exceeded whenever an award of aggravated damages is warranted, correct.

DEFAMATION – Appeal – Damages – Damages for economic loss – Claim for special damages – Loss of valuable opportunity – Real review of the evidence – Plaintiff failed to establish relevant opportunity – Plaintiff failed to establish articles caused loss of opportunity – Relevance of grapevine – Judge erred in overestimation of spread and impact of grapevine effect – Judge’s award of damages for economic loss set aside.

DEFAMATION – Appeal – Damages – Damages for general decline in business – Andrews damages – Andrews v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd [1980] 2 NSWLR 225, Ratcliffe v Evans [1892] 2 QB 524, Chakravarti  v Advertiser Newspapers Ltd (1998) 193 CLR 519, discussed – Claim for Andrews damages not made out.

STATUTES – Appeal – Construction of s 35 of Defamation Act 2005 – Plain words of statute – Whether plain words should be displaced by other considerations – Plain words not displaced – Defamation Act 2005 ss 1, 3, 6, 23, 34, 35, 37 and 38.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicants	Mr M F Wheelahan QC with Mr S Mukerjea	Johnson Winter & Slattery
For the Respondent	Dr M J Collins QC with Ms R L Enbom	Corrs Chambers Westgarth

TATE JA
BEACH JA
ASHLEY JA:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The defamatory publications.....................................................................................	5
Plaintiff’s imputations and Bauer’s ultimate defences.........................................	6
The trial.........................................................................................................................	11
Grounds of appeal........................................................................................................	14
Relevant background...................................................................................................	16
AGGRAVATED DAMAGES.......................................................................................	24
The plaintiff’s claim for aggravated damages.........................................................	24
Aggravating circumstances:  the judge’s findings...................................................	27
The aggravated damages findings about which Bauer makes complaint...........	36
Bauer’s pursuit of…