CITATION: Cha v Oh (No. 23) [2009] NSWDC 336 HEARING DATE(S): 11 December 2009
JUDGMENT DATE:
14 December 2009JURISDICTION: Civil JUDGMENT OF: Gibson DCJ DECISION: Interest:
(1) Vary order (3) of my judgment dated 8 December 2009 to read:
"(3) Judgment for the plaintiff for a total of $303,834.09 against each of the second, fourth and fifth defendants for each of the following publications and in each of the following sums:
(a) Judgment against the second defendant for the matter complained of dated 26 January 2001 in the sum of $30,000 plus interest of $7,979.26, making a total of $37,979.26;
(b) Judgment against the second defendant for the matter complained of dated 9 February 2001 in the sum of $30,000 plus interest of $7,979.26, making a total of $37,979.26;
(c) Judgment against the second defendant for the matter complained of dated 23 February 2001 in the sum of $30,000 plus interest of $7,979.26, making a total of $37,979.26;
(d) Judgment against the second, fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of dated 1 March 2001 in the sum of $30,000 plus interest of $7,979.26, making a total of $37,979.26;
(e) Judgment against the second, fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of dated 9 March 2001 in the sum of $20,000 plus interest of $5,319.51, making a total of $25,319.51;
(f) Judgment against the second, fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of dated 16 March 2001 in the sum of $10,000 plus interest of $2,659.75, making a total of $12,659.75;
(g) Judgment against the second defendant for the matter complained of dated 30 March 2001 in the sum of $50,000 plus interest of $13,298.77, making a total of $63,298.77;
(h) Judgment against the fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of in Hojudonga dated 1 March 2001 in the sum of $15,000 plus interest of $3,989.63, making a total of 18,989.63;
(i) Judgment against the fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of in Hojudonga dated 9 March 2001 in the sum of $10,000 plus interest of $2,659.75, making a total of $12,659.75;
(j) Judgment against the fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of in Hojudonga dated 16 March 2001 in the sum of $5,000 plus interest of $1,329.88, making a total of $6,329.88;
(k) Judgment against the fourth and fifth defendants for the matters complained of in the Korean Herald dated 1, 9 and 16 March 2001 in the sum of $5,000, $3,000 and $2,000, plus interest of $1,329.88, $797.93 and $531.95 respectively, making a total of $12,659.76."
Costs
(1) Vary order (6) of my judgment of 8 December to provide that costs of these proceedings for the period 25 September to 12 December 2007 and for 23 March 2009 onwards are to be paid by the second defendant on an indemnity basis.
(2) Otherwise dismiss the plaintiff’s application for indemnity costs pursuant to s 48A.
(3) I certify for representation of the plaintiff by two junior counsel.
Stay of…
Continue reading Cha v Oh (No. 23)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Cha v Oh (No. 23) [2009] NSWDC 336
- Case
- [2009] NSWDC 336
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues in the case were whether the defendants were liable for defamation, the extent of the damages, the interest on the judgment, and the allocation of costs. The court had to consider the principles of defamation law, including the meaning of the defamatory statements, their publication, and their impact on the plaintiff's reputation. The court also had to determine the appropriate interest on the judgment, considering the statutory provisions and the conduct of the parties during the trial. Finally, the court had to decide on the costs of the proceedings, including the indemnity costs sought by the plaintiff.
The court found that the defendants were liable for defamation and awarded damages to the plaintiff. The court calculated the interest on the judgment based on the statutory provisions and the conduct of the defendants during the trial. The court rejected the plaintiff's application for indemnity costs but ordered the defendants to pay costs on an indemnity basis for specific periods. The court granted the defendants' applications for a stay of proceedings pending appeal, subject to certain conditions, including the payment of a holding sum and the filing of an appeal within a specified time.
The court made several orders in the case. The court varied the interest on the judgment to reflect the correct amounts for each defamatory publication. The court ordered the defendants to pay costs on an indemnity basis for specific periods and certified the plaintiff's representation by two junior counsel. The court granted the defendants' applications for a stay of proceedings pending appeal, subject to conditions, including the payment of a holding sum and the filing of an appeal within a specified time. The court also provided the plaintiff with liberty to apply to have the stay revoked in the event of any failure to comply with the conditions.
Orders
Orders of the court
Interest:
(1) Vary order (3) of my judgment dated 8 December 2009 to read:
"(3) Judgment for the plaintiff for a total of $303,834.09 against each of the second, fourth and fifth defendants for each of the following publications and in each of the following sums:
(a) Judgment against the second defendant for the matter complained of dated 26 January 2001 in the sum of $30,000 plus interest of $7,979.26, making a total of $37,979.26;
(b) Judgment against the second defendant for the matter complained of dated 9 February 2001 in the sum of $30,000 plus interest of $7,979.26, making a total of $37,979.26;
(c) Judgment against the second defendant for the matter complained of dated 23 February 2001 in the sum of $30,000 plus interest of $7,979.26, making a total of $37,979.26;
(d) Judgment against the second, fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of dated 1 March 2001 in the sum of $30,000 plus interest of $7,979.26, making a total of $37,979.26;
(e) Judgment against the second, fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of dated 9 March 2001 in the sum of $20,000 plus interest of $5,319.51, making a total of $25,319.51;
(f) Judgment against the second, fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of dated 16 March 2001 in the sum of $10,000 plus interest of $2,659.75, making a total of $12,659.75;
(g) Judgment against the second defendant for the matter complained of dated 30 March 2001 in the sum of $50,000 plus interest of $13,298.77, making a total of $63,298.77;
(h) Judgment against the fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of in Hojudonga dated 1 March 2001 in the sum of $15,000 plus interest of $3,989.63, making a total of 18,989.63;
(i) Judgment against the fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of in Hojudonga dated 9 March 2001 in the sum of $10,000 plus interest of $2,659.75, making a total of $12,659.75;
(j) Judgment against the fourth and fifth defendants for the matter complained of in Hojudonga dated 16 March 2001 in the sum of $5,000 plus interest of $1,329.88, making a total of $6,329.88;
(k) Judgment against the fourth and fifth defendants for the matters complained of in the Korean Herald dated 1, 9 and 16 March 2001 in the sum of $5,000, $3,000 and $2,000, plus interest of $1,329.88, $797.93 and $531.95 respectively, making a total of $12,659.76."
Costs
(1) Vary order (6) of my judgment of 8 December to provide that costs of these proceedings for the period 25 September to 12 December 2007 and for 23 March 2009 onwards are to be paid by the second defendant on an indemnity basis.
(2) Otherwise dismiss the plaintiff’s application for indemnity costs pursuant to s 48A.
(3) I certify for representation of the plaintiff by two junior counsel.
Stay of proceedings
(4) The second defendant’s application for a stay (including a stay in relation to legal costs) is granted, but upon compliance with the following steps:
(a) The second defendant is to pay the plaintiff (or his solicitors, upon receipt of a signed Authority to Receive) the sum of $100,000.00 within twenty-eight (28) days of the date of making these orders, namely 14 December 2009; and,
(b) The second defendant is to file a Holding Summons or Notice of Appeal within twenty-eight days of the date of making these orders, namely 14 December 2009; and,
(c) The second defendant undertakes to the court to commence and prosecute the appeal in these proceedings expeditiously.
(5) In the event of any failure to comply with any of the above steps, the plaintiff has liberty to apply on 2 days notice to have the stay revoked.
(6) The fourth defendant’s application for a stay is granted, including a stay of any claim for legal costs.
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.