Gary Howes v ACP Magazines Limited

In the case of Gary Howes v ACP Magazines Limited, the plaintiff, Mr Howes, initiated proceedings against the defendant, ACP Magazines Limited, for defamation. The dispute centred around an article published in a magazine that Mr Howes claimed defamed him. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia, presided over by Justice Bromberg.

The primary legal issue the court had to decide was whether the case should be tried by a jury of twelve members instead of the usual six. The court considered whether the third defendant, a prominent person, had a significant public interest in the issues being tried. It examined the relevant considerations under the applicable law, focusing on whether the defamation case's issues were unrelated to the public activities of the third defendant. The court also assessed whether the case involved matters of public concern that warranted a jury trial.

Justice Bromberg concluded that the defamation case did not involve issues unrelated to the public activities of the third defendant. The court determined that the relevant considerations did not support the need for a jury of twelve members. Consequently, the application for a jury of twelve was dismissed. The case would proceed with the usual six-member jury. The court's reasoning was grounded in the specific circumstances of the defamation case and the applicable legal principles concerning jury composition in defamation matters.