Dean v Vrettos - [2014] NSWSC 186

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Dean v Vrettos [2014] NSWSC 186
Hearing dates: 3 March 2014
Decision date: 03 March 2014
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Beech-Jones J
Decision:
Notes
The issues in dispute are:
(1) Whether the matters complained of in the first amended statement of claim were published of and concerning the plaintiff?
(2) The extent of the publication of the matters complained of?
(3) Whether the matters complained of conveyed the imputations pleaded in the first amended statement of claim?
(4) Whether any such imputations that were conveyed were defamatory?
(5) The quantum of damages to be recovered by the plaintiff, if any (including whether they are aggravated)?
Orders:
(1) The filing of a defence that raises the issues noted by the Court be dispensed with.
(2) Subject to further order, the matter proceed to hearing only in respect of the issues noted by the Court.
(3) Pursuant to s 146(1) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), the proceedings be transferred to the District Court.

Catchwords: DEFAMATION - default judgment - whether issues in plaintiff's case truly in dispute - dispensing with filing of defence - transfer of proceedings to District Court.
Legislation Cited: - Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 56
- District Court Act 1973 (NSW), s 44
- Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
Cases Cited: - Bodenstein v Hope Street Urban Compassion [2014] NSWSC 174
- Graham v Powell (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 2026
Category: Interlocutory applications
Parties: Robert William Dean (Plaintiff)
Peter Vrettos (Defendant)
Representation: Counsel:
In person (Plaintiff)
In person (Defendant)
Solicitors:
In person (Plaintiff)
In person (Defendant)

File Number(s): 2013/134499

ex tempore Judgment

Before me are competing applications by the parties to either strike out their opponent's pleadings or otherwise obtain judgment in their favour. To place these applications in context it is necessary to say something about the background to the proceedings.

The plaintiff, Mr Robert William Dean, sues the defendant, Mr Peter Vrettos, in defamation. He has identified thirty-four matters complained of in his first amended statement of claim. The matters complained of are all said to be posts placed by Mr Vrettos on an Australian based internet Australian Stock Exchange chat forum located at the website "topstocks.com.au".

Mr Dean contends, but Mr Vrettos does not necessarily accept, that "topstocks" operates in a manner whereby members can post comments in relation to particular stocks, and members and non-members can view those comments. Mr Vrettos repeatedly referred to the fact that it is an anonymous forum. By that I understand him to contend that it is at least the practice of the forum for persons not to use their name but instead to use some form of pseudonym, presumably associated with their user name. Be that as it may, no part of the internet is a defamation-free zone so that it is, of course, conceivable that posts on an anonymous forum can nevertheless defame someone if they are capable of being identified.

On 8 October…

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 Dean v Vrettos

Details

AGLC: Dean v Vrettos [2014] NSWSC 186
Case: [2014] NSWSC 186
Decision Date: 03 March 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Dean v Vrettos involved a defamation case where the plaintiff sought default judgment against the defendant. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had made defamatory statements about him, which led to reputational damage. The matter was initially heard in the Local Court of New South Wales, which had jurisdiction over the case.

The court was required to determine whether the issues presented in the plaintiff's case were genuinely in dispute. If the issues were not in dispute, the court could consider dispensing with the defendant's need to file a defence. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the proceedings should be transferred to the District Court of New South Wales due to the nature and complexity of the defamation claim.

In its reasoning, the court found that the defendant had not genuinely disputed the issues raised by the plaintiff. The defendant's silence in the face of the allegations indicated that the claims were accepted as true. Therefore, the court dispensed with the requirement for the defendant to file a defence. Furthermore, given the nature and complexity of the defamation claim, the court determined that the matter should be transferred to the District Court for further proceedings.

Consequently, the court granted the plaintiff's application for default judgment and ordered the transfer of the proceedings to the District Court. The plaintiff was also awarded damages and costs associated with the proceedings. The defendant was given the opportunity to challenge the default judgment and damages in the District Court.

Orders