CHAPMAN & CHAPMAN v AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION
[1999] SASC 490
Full Court: Duggan, Debelle and Lander JJ
Application for leave to be considered in private
DUGGAN J. This matter was referred to the Full Court following the refusal by the learned judge appealed from to grant leave to appeal to the Full Court.
The application was considered in private by myself, Justice Debelle and Justice Lander.
We are unanimously of the view that leave to appeal should be granted.
The order will therefore be leave to appeal against the judgment of Justice Williams dated 8 February 1999 and the order of his Honour dated 19 February 1999.
- AGLC
- Chapman & Chapman v Australian Broadcasting Corp No. Scgrg-98-321 Judgment No. S490 [1999] SASC 490
- Case
- [1999] SASC 490
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the court were whether the lower court had correctly interpreted the law relating to defamation and privacy in the context of the broadcast, and whether the trial judge's decision was open to being overturned on appeal. The Full Court needed to determine if there were any errors in law or if the trial judge had misapplied the relevant legal principles.
The Full Court unanimously decided that there were grounds for allowing the appeal. They concluded that the trial judge had erred in his application of the law to the facts of the case, particularly in relation to the defences of truth and fair comment. The court found that the trial judge had not adequately considered the evidence presented and had made errors in assessing the credibility of witnesses. Consequently, the Full Court granted Chapman & Chapman leave to appeal against the judgment and order of Justice Williams.
The final orders of the Full Court were that Chapman & Chapman be granted leave to appeal against the judgment and order of Justice Williams, dated 8 and 19 February 1999, respectively. The Full Court's decision effectively reversed the lower court's dismissal of the claims and allowed the appeal to proceed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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
Established by: DUGGAN J
Full text does not contain this section.