DOBBS & MOORE

This matter concerned an application by the plaintiff, DOBBS, for an interlocutory injunction against the defendant, MOORE. DOBBS sought to restrain MOORE from continuing to publish certain allegedly defamatory material concerning DOBBS. The application was heard by Altobelli J in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether DOBBS had established a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits of its defamation claim to warrant the grant of an interlocutory injunction. This required the Court to consider whether the published material was capable of being found defamatory and whether MOORE had any available defences, such as truth or honest opinion. The Court also had to assess the balance of convenience, considering the potential harm to DOBBS if the injunction was not granted versus the potential harm to MOORE if it was.

Altobelli J reasoned that for an interlocutory injunction to be granted in defamation proceedings, the plaintiff must demonstrate a strong prima facie case. His Honour found that the material published by MOORE was capable of conveying defamatory meanings concerning DOBBS. While MOORE raised the defence of truth, the evidence presented at the interlocutory stage was not sufficiently compelling to establish that defence with a high degree of certainty. Considering the balance of convenience, Altobelli J concluded that the potential damage to DOBBS's reputation if the publication continued outweighed the potential prejudice to MOORE.

Accordingly, Altobelli J granted the interlocutory injunction, restraining MOORE from publishing the identified defamatory material pending the final determination of the proceedings.