Davis v Nationwide News Pty Ltd

The proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia involved Davis, a former employee of the defendant, Nationwide News Pty Ltd, who brought an action for defamation against the defendant. The dispute centred on two publications by the defendant that were alleged to have defamed Davis. The first was a news article published in The Australian Financial Review, and the second was a report by Sky News Australia. The issues before the Court were the operation of the statutory cap on damages in defamation cases, the impact of the jury's finding of malice on the harm sustained by Davis, the availability of aggravated damages, the falsity of the defamatory imputations, the defendant's failure to offer an apology, and whether the conduct of the trial had aggravated the plaintiff's damages.

The Court considered whether the statutory cap on damages applied to each cause of action separately or in the aggregate. It held that the cap applied to each cause of action independently. The Court also found that the jury's determination of malice did not affect the harm experienced by Davis, thus it did not influence the assessment of damages. The Court held that aggravated damages were available because of the falsity of the imputations, the failure to apologise, and the conduct of the trial. The Court concluded that the statutory cap did not limit the award of aggravated damages.

The Court ordered that the statutory cap on damages did not apply to the award of aggravated damages. The Court awarded Davis aggravated damages in the amount of $200,000. The Court also ordered that Nationwide News pay Davis's costs of the proceeding. The Court found that the jury's determination of malice did not affect the harm experienced by Davis and thus did not influence the assessment of damages. The Court also found that the defendant's failure to offer an apology and the conduct of the trial had aggravated the plaintiff's damages.