Carson & Anor v Rajski

The applicants, Carson and another, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Court of Appeal. The dispute concerned the construction of a section of the New South Wales Defamation Act.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the Court of Appeal had erred in its interpretation of the relevant section of the Defamation Act, particularly in its application of the principles established in *Calwell v Ipec Australia Ltd*. The applicants argued that the Court of Appeal's majority judgment failed to properly consider or apply *Calwell v Ipec*, while a dissenting judgment suggested that the question of "purpose" under the Act caused "constant difficulty" in its application.

The applicants contended that the Court of Appeal's decision was wrong because it either ignored or wrongly distinguished *Calwell v Ipec*. They argued that, based on the facts alleged in the statement of claim alone, a defence arose under the Defamation Act, and that the Court of Appeal's consideration of motive and intention in relation to the statutory concept of "purpose" was erroneous. The applicants sought to demonstrate that their case presented a problem requiring elucidation from the High Court regarding the application of *Calwell v Ipec* in the context of the Defamation Act.