Carolan v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (No 8)

Case

[2017] NSWSC 1757

14 December 2017


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Carolan v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (No 8) [2017] NSWSC 1757 [2017] NSWSC 1757 14 December 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Carolan v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (No 8) involved the plaintiff, Carolan, who sought damages for defamation against the defendants, Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd. The dispute arose from defamatory statements published by the defendants on their website, which Carolan argued caused damage to his reputation. After a successful claim for damages, Carolan applied for an injunction to prevent further publication of the defamatory material. The defendants opposed the injunction but later removed the material from their website, leading to the withdrawal of the application.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the defendants should be ordered to pay the costs of Carolan's unsuccessful application for injunctive relief. The defendants argued that the costs should follow the event, given that Carolan had ultimately succeeded in his defamation claim but failed in his application for an injunction. The court needed to balance the usual rule that costs follow the event against the defendants' inordinate delay in removing the defamatory content from their website.

In deciding the matter, the court noted that the usual rule is that costs follow the event, but this is not an inflexible rule. The court considered the defendants' argument that there was significant delay in removing the defamatory material, but it had previously accepted that any delay was adequately explained. The court found that the defendants' actions in ultimately removing the material from their website mitigated the delay and that the defendants should not be penalised for their actions in removing the content. Consequently, the court ordered that the costs of the unsuccessful application for injunctive relief be borne by the defendants.

The final orders of the court were that the defendants were to pay the costs of the unsuccessful application for injunctive relief, reflecting the court's consideration of the defendants' explanation for the delay and their ultimate action in removing the defamatory material from their website.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Media & Entertainment Law

  • Defamation

Legal Concepts

  • Compensatory Damages

  • Injunction

  • Costs

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0