FU -v- WINSTAR GROUP PTY LTD [2014] WASC 496

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2014] WASC 496
Case No:	CIV:2650/2014	Heard:	9 DECEMBER 2014
Coram:	LE MIERE J	Delivered:	19/12/14
No of pages:	18	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application granted in part
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	HONG FU AHYEONG JEONG HANDS ON COMPUTER TRAINING INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD T/AS THE AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF COMMERCE AND TECHNOLOGY WINSTAR GROUP PTY LTD BYOUNG JU CHA MEI VOON NG HAROLD KONRAD SIMON LEE
Catchwords:	Tort Defamation Application for interlocutory injunction Prima facie case Whether inconvenience or injury the plaintiff would be likely to suffer if an injunction were refused outweighs or would outweigh the injury the defendant would suffer if injunction were granted Tort Injurious falsehood False statements concerning the plaintiff's business Publication of that statement by the defendant to a third party Malice on the part of the defendant Actual damage suffered as a result of the statement Application for interlocutory injunction Prima facie case Balance of convenience
Legislation:	Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 (Cth), s 19 Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 12 r 1(2), O 59 r 5
Case References:	AMI Australia Holdings Pty Ltd v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 1395 Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill (2006) 227 CLR 57 Beechwood Homes (NSW) Pty Ltd v Camenzuli [2010] NSWSC 521 Palmer Bruyn & Parker Pty Ltd v Parsons [2001] HCA 69; (2001) 208 CLR 388 Rana v Google Australia Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 60 Swimsure (Laboratories) Pty Ltd v McDonald [1979] 2 NSWLR 796 Tamiz v Google Inc [2013] 1 WLR 2151 Trkulja v Google (No 5) [2012] VSC 533 Wishart v Murray [2013] 3 NZLR 246

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

CITATION : FU -v- WINSTAR GROUP PTY LTD [2014] WASC 496 CORAM : LE MIERE J HEARD : 9 DECEMBER 2014 DELIVERED : 19 DECEMBER 2014 FILE NO/S : CIV 2650 of 2014 BETWEEN : HONG FU

First Plaintiff

AHYEONG JEONG

Second Plaintiff

HANDS ON COMPUTER TRAINING INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD T/AS THE AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF COMMERCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Third Plaintiff

AND

WINSTAR GROUP PTY LTD

First Defendant

BYOUNG JU CHA

Second Defendant

MEI VOON NG

Third Defendant

HAROLD KONRAD SIMON LEE

Fourth Defendant

Catchwords:

Tort - Defamation - Application for interlocutory injunction - Prima facie case - Whether inconvenience or injury the plaintiff would be likely to suffer if an injunction were refused outweighs or would outweigh the injury the defendant would suffer if injunction were granted

Tort - Injurious falsehood - False statements concerning the plaintiff's business - Publication of that statement by the defendant to a third party - Malice on the part of the defendant - Actual damage suffered as a result of the statement - Application for interlocutory injunction - Prima facie case - Balance of convenience

Legislation:

Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 (Cth), s 19

Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 12…

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 Fu v Winstar Group Pty Ltd

Details

AGLC: Fu v Winstar Group Pty Ltd [2014] WASC 496
Case: [2014] WASC 496
Decision Date: 19 DECEMBER 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Fu v Winstar Group Pty Ltd involved a dispute over defamatory statements and injurious falsehoods made by the defendant, Winstar Group, against the plaintiff, Mr Fu. The plaintiff sought an interlocutory injunction to prevent the defendant from continuing to publish defamatory statements about him and his business. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The court was required to determine whether Mr Fu had established a prima facie case for defamation and injurious falsehood. Additionally, the court had to consider the balance of convenience, weighing the inconvenience or injury Mr Fu would likely suffer if the injunction were refused against the injury Winstar Group would suffer if the injunction were granted. The court also needed to assess whether the defendant acted with malice and whether the plaintiff had suffered actual damage as a result of the statements.

The court found that Mr Fu had established a prima facie case for defamation and injurious falsehood. The defamatory and false statements made by Winstar Group were published to a third party and were made with malice. Furthermore, the court accepted that Mr Fu had suffered actual damage as a result of these statements. The court concluded that the balance of convenience favoured granting the interlocutory injunction in part, as the potential injury to Mr Fu if the injunction were refused outweighed the injury to Winstar Group if the injunction were granted.

The court granted the application for an interlocutory injunction in part, preventing Winstar Group from continuing to publish the defamatory and false statements.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application granted in part

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.