Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd v Pedavoli

Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (the appellant) appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a judgment of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in favour of Ms Pedavoli (the respondent). The dispute concerned newspaper articles published by Fairfax which imputed that a female teacher at a boys' school had engaged in sexual misconduct with Year 12 students. Although the respondent was not named in the articles, she alleged she was identifiable by readers due to the inclusion of incorrect details.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the respondent could rely on extrinsic facts acquired by readers after the publication of the articles to establish that she was identified by the defamatory imputations. Further, the Court considered whether the appellant had implicitly invited readers to visit the school website to ascertain the identity of the teacher. The Court also had to assess damages, including aggravated damages, under sections 34 and 35 of the *Defamation Act 2005* (NSW), considering the principles applicable to such assessments, the propriety of cross-examination, and the use of post-publication evidence regarding reputation and the scope of publication.

The Court of Appeal applied the principles established in *Baltinos v James* and other authorities, holding that a plaintiff can rely on extrinsic facts to establish identification, even if those facts are acquired after publication, provided the matter complained of is capable of referring to the plaintiff. The Court found that the articles, when read in conjunction with the extrinsic facts available to readers, were capable of identifying the respondent. The Court also determined that the appellant’s conduct, including the nature of the publication and the subsequent cross-examination, justified an award of aggravated damages.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellants were ordered to pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal.