Chompuchan v Srimongkol - [2025] NSWDC 161

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Chompuchan v Srimongkol [2025] NSWDC 161
Hearing dates: 17 April 2025
Date of orders: 17 April 2025
Decision date: 17 April 2025
Jurisdiction: Civil
Before: Gibson DCJ
Decision:
(1) Grant leave pursuant to s 23 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) for the plaintiffs to commence proceedings against the defendant for the First Matter Complained Of.
(2)   The defendant is to file a defence 28 days from today, namely 7 May 2025.
(3)   Stood over for further directions on 8 May 2025, for further hearing on the application for summary judgment and assessment of damages.
(4)   The plaintiffs are to serve the defendant personally at her home address and through her email with a copy of these orders by Tuesday 22 April 2025 at 5:00PM.
(5)   Reserve costs.

Catchwords:
TORT – defamation – application for leave under s 23 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) to commence fresh proceedings against the same party for the same subject matter – leave granted

Legislation Cited:
Defamation Act 2005 (NSW), ss 10A, 12A and 23
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 29.7

Cases Cited:
Altarama Ltd v Forsyth [1981] 1 NSWLR 188
Feldman v Huf (Ruling) [2023] VCC 743
Flanagan v Urban Publishing Group Pty Ltd [2012] NSWDC 238
French v Triple M Melbourne Pty Ltd [2006] VSC 36
Graham v Powell (No 3) [2014] NSWSC 185
Hockey v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (No 2) (2015) 237 FCR 127
Ivory v Howard [2024] FCA 1416
Rastogi v Nolan [2010] NSWSC 735
Whittington v Newman [2025] NSWSC 275
Woods v Baxter [2021] NSWDC 265

Texts Cited:
Nil

Category: Procedural rulings
Parties: Kedchada Chompuchan (First Plaintiff)
Peejay Capati (Second Plaintiff)
Homeland Realty Pty Ltd trading as Paragon Realty Group (Third Plaintiff)
Puttarawadee Srimongkol (Defendant)
Representation:
Counsel:
T Senior (Plaintiffs)
Defendant (no appearance)
Solicitors:
Origo Law (Plaintiffs)
Defendant (no appearance)

File Number(s): 2025/00134364
Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

Introduction

This is an application by the plaintiffs for leave to commence defamation proceedings against the defendant in respect of the first of four matters complained of. The plaintiffs bring proceedings against the defendant for a further three publications in their Statement of Claim, filed 8 April 2025.
The application is supported by the affidavit of Mr Hao (David) Fan, affirmed 27 March 2025, which sets out the circumstances in which the plaintiffs commenced and then discontinued a claim for the first matter complained of.
The defendant did not attend or participate in the hearing. As set out below, I have satisfied myself, pursuant to the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) (“UCPR”) that the defendant has been informed of this application and of the date and location for these proceedings.

Background

The defendant published allegations about the plaintiffs in a Facebook post on 3 June 2024. On 19 June 2024, the solicitors for the plaintiffs, Origo Law, sent a letter to the defendant that was identified as and intended to be a concerns notice…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Chompuchan v Srimongkol

Details

AGLC: Chompuchan v Srimongkol [2025] NSWDC 161
Case: [2025] NSWDC 161
Decision Date: 17 April 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Chompuchan v Srimongkol, the plaintiffs sought leave to commence fresh defamation proceedings against the defendant for statements previously made by the defendant that were alleged to be defamatory. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where the plaintiffs argued that the previous proceedings had not fully resolved the issues at hand, warranting a new action. The court was tasked with determining whether the plaintiffs were entitled to commence fresh proceedings under section 23 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW).

The central legal issue before the court was whether the plaintiffs had established grounds for being granted leave to bring new defamation proceedings against the defendant for the same defamatory matter. The court had to consider whether there were significant and new matters that warranted a fresh proceeding, as well as whether the plaintiffs had acted with diligence in seeking the new proceedings. The court also had to assess whether the public interest considerations favoured granting the leave.

The court granted the plaintiffs leave to commence fresh proceedings, finding that there were significant and new matters that had not been fully addressed in the previous proceedings. The court noted that the plaintiffs had acted with diligence and that the public interest considerations supported the grant of leave. The court ordered that the defendant must file a defence within 28 days from the date of the orders. The case was stood over for further directions and a hearing on the application for summary judgment and assessment of damages. The plaintiffs were also required to serve the defendant with a copy of the orders by a specified date. The court reserved the matter of costs for later determination.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Grant leave pursuant to s 23 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) for the plaintiffs to commence proceedings against the defendant for the First Matter Complained Of.

(2) The defendant is to file a defence 28 days from today, namely 7 May 2025.

(3) Stood over for further directions on 8 May 2025, for further hearing on the application for summary judgment and assessment of damages.

(4) The plaintiffs are to serve the defendant personally at her home address and through her email with a copy of these orders by Tuesday 22 April 2025 at 5:00PM.

(5) Reserve 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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Chompuchan v Srimongkol [2025] NSWDC 161
Hearing dates:	17 April 2025
Date of orders:	17 April 2025
Decision date:	17 April 2025
Jurisdiction:	Civil
Before:	Gibson DCJ
Decision:	(1) Grant leave pursuant to s 23 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) for the plaintiffs to commence proceedings against the defendant for the First Matter Complained Of. (2) The defendant is to file a defence 28 days from today, namely 7 May 2025. (3) Stood over for further directions on 8 May 2025, for further hearing on the application for summary judgment and assessment of damages. (4) The plaintiffs are to serve the defendant personally at her home address and through her email with a copy of these orders by Tuesday 22 April 2025 at 5:00PM. (5) Reserve costs.
Catchwords:	TORT – defamation – application for leave under s 23 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) to commence fresh proceedings against the same party for the same subject matter – leave granted
Legislation Cited:	Defamation Act 2005 (NSW), ss 10A, 12A and 23 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 29.7
Cases Cited:	Altarama Ltd v Forsyth [1981] 1 NSWLR 188 Feldman v Huf (Ruling) [2023] VCC 743 Flanagan v Urban Publishing Group Pty Ltd [2012] NSWDC 238 French v Triple M Melbourne Pty Ltd [2006] VSC 36 Graham v Powell (No 3) [2014] NSWSC 185 Hockey v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (No 2) (2015) 237 FCR 127 Ivory v Howard [2024] FCA 1416 Rastogi v Nolan [2010] NSWSC 735 Whittington v Newman [2025] NSWSC 275 Woods v Baxter [2021] NSWDC 265
Texts Cited:	Nil
Category:	Procedural rulings
Parties:	Kedchada Chompuchan (First Plaintiff) Peejay Capati (Second Plaintiff) Homeland Realty Pty Ltd trading as Paragon Realty Group (Third Plaintiff) Puttarawadee Srimongkol (Defendant)
Representation:	Counsel: T Senior (Plaintiffs) Defendant (no appearance) Solicitors: Origo Law (Plaintiffs) Defendant (no appearance)
File Number(s):	2025/00134364
Publication restriction:	Nil