Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Farrow v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2017] NSWCA 246 Hearing dates: 13 September 2017 Date of orders: 13 September 2017 Decision date: 28 September 2017 Before: Basten JA at [1]
Sackville AJA at [6]
McCallum J at [12]Decision: 1. Pursuant to s 7 of the Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW), grant the respondent leave to appear and be represented in this proceeding.
2. Pursuant to s 6(2) of the Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW) refuse the applicant leave to appeal from the judgments and orders made in the District Court on 27 February 2017 and 2 March 2017.
3. Order that the applicant pay the respondent’s costs in this Court.Catchwords: PRISONERS – civil proceedings – application by prisoner for leave to institute proceedings for defamation in the District Court – appeal against judge’s refusal of leave – statement of claim including true imputations and imputations relating to findings and evidence at proceedings on sentence – whether proceedings are an abuse of process
DEFAMATION – imputations – whether the pleading of incontrovertibly true imputations by a plaintiff amounts to an abuse of processLegislation Cited: Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), s 307.2
Defamation Act 2005 (NSW), s 42
Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW), ss 4, 5, 6(2), 7Cases Cited: Application of Potier [2012] NSWCA 222
Bleyer v Google (2014) 88 NSWLR 670; [2014] NSWSC 897
Farrow v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2017] NSWDC 28
Plato Films Ltd v Speidel [1961] AC 1090Category: Principal judgment Parties: Simone Farrow (applicant)
Nationwide News Pty Ltd (respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
C Evatt, R Rasmussen (applicant)
ATS Dawson SC, C Amato (respondent)
Sanford Legal (applicant)
News Limited (respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/79891 Decision under appeal
- Court or tribunal:
- District Court NSW
- Jurisdiction:
- Civil
- Date of Decision:
- 27 February 2017
- Before:
- Gibson DCJ
Judgment
-
BASTEN JA: I agree with the reasons given by McCallum J for refusing the applicant leave to appeal against the judgment of the District Court, which in turn refused her leave to commence proceedings against the respondent.
-
As it is not necessary to go further, the following observations are intended to emphasise the limited basis upon which the matter has been determined.
-
First, in my view the requirement for an applicant under the Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW) to establish a “prima facie case” means, in a proceeding seeking damages for defamation, a prima facie case of entitlement to non-trivial damages.
-
Secondly, on an application for leave to commence proceedings, the Court should have regard to the requirements of Pt 6 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), and the overriding purpose of the Act and rules in their application to civil proceedings. The grant of leave is an exercise in “the practice and procedure of the court”, for the purposes of s 60. The requirement that “the cost to the parties is proportionate to the importance and complexity of the subject matter in…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Farrow v Nationwide News Pty Ltd and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2017] NSWCA 246
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the prisoner's proposed defamation proceedings constituted an abuse of process, particularly in light of the inclusion of incontrovertibly true imputations within the statement of claim, and whether the prisoner should be granted leave to appeal the District Court's decision.
The Court of Appeal considered the principles governing abuse of process, noting that while a plaintiff is generally entitled to plead true imputations, the context and purpose of such pleading within the overall claim are relevant. The Court found that the prisoner's proposed proceedings, as framed, were likely to be an abuse of process. This conclusion was informed by the nature of the alleged imputations and the prisoner's status as a convicted person seeking to litigate matters already considered in criminal proceedings.
Consequently, the Court of Appeal granted the respondent leave to appear and be represented, but refused the applicant leave to appeal the District Court's judgments and orders. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Pursuant to s 7 of the Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW), grant the respondent leave to appear and be represented in this proceeding.
2. Pursuant to s 6(2) of the Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW) refuse the applicant leave to appeal from the judgments and orders made in the District Court on 27 February 2017 and 2 March 2017.
3. Order that the applicant pay the respondent’s costs in this Court.
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.