District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Gim v Byeon [2017] NSWDC 136 Hearing dates: 30 and 31 March 2017; 26 April 2017;1 June 2017 Date of orders: 08 June 2017 Decision date: 08 June 2017 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Gibson DCJ Decision: (1) Judgment for the defendant.
(2) Costs reserved with liberty to apply.
(3) Exhibits retained until further order.Catchwords: TORT – defamation – slander – journalist has conversation with the defendant (a restaurant proprietor) after giving his lunch order and while waiting for his meal to arrive – whether the defendant published the words of and concerning the plaintiff as attributed to him in the matter complained of – whether the defendant was liable for republication of the matter complained of at a lunch the journalist had with friends at another restaurant five days later – claims for publication and republication fail – judgment for defendant Legislation Cited: Defamation Act 2005 (NSW), ss 34 and 40 Cases Cited: Allen v Lloyd-Jones (No 6) [2014] NSWDC 40
Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298
Jones v Sutton (2004) 61 NSWLR 614
Jones v Sutton (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 203
Luke v Richardson [2014] WADC 27
McGlen-McLeod v Galloway [2012] NSWCA 368
Milne v Ell [2017] NSWSC 555
Richards v State of New South Wales [2004] VSC 198
Ritson v Burns [2014] NSWSC 272
Sims v Wran [1984] 1 NSWLR 317
Speight v Gosnay (1891) 60 LJQB 231
Slipper v British Broadcasting Corporation [1991] 1 QB 283
Timms v Clift [1998] 2 Qd R 100
Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2011] EWHC 1884 (QB)
Umeyor v Ibe [2016] EWHC 862Texts Cited: R. Parkes QC, A. Mullis, G. Busuttil, A. Speker & A. Scot, Gatley on Libel and Slander (Sweet & Maxwell, United Kingdom, 12th ed.) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Plaintiff: Ick Hee Gim
Defendant: Jong Yoon ByeonRepresentation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
Plaintiff: Mr M Rollinson
Defendant: Mr J R Young
Plaintiff: Teddington Legal
Defendant: Kim & Associates
File Number(s): 2015/241148 Publication restriction: None
Judgment
Introduction
-
The plaintiff commenced proceedings for defamation for words allegedly spoken by the defendant in the Korean language with a Korean journalist, Mr Sang Jin Kwoun, on Wednesday 28 January 2015 and for Mr Kwoun’s republication of those words to three friends at a lunch at another restaurant on 4 February 2015.
-
The background facts, as reported in the Korean media, were as follows. The plaintiff, a businessman, managed a Korean/Australian baseball team and travelled with them to China for a match several times in 2014. He arranged for a baseball team from Guangzhou to come to Australia for a match in late December 2014, but remained in Australia himself. It is not in dispute that, as the news reports set out below confirm, members of that baseball team were detained at Guangzhou Airport on 30 December 2014 after a significant quantity of illicit drugs was found in some team members’ luggage. This was widely reported in the overseas media and by SBS but…
Continue reading Gim v Byeon
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Gim v Byeon [2017] NSWDC 136
- Case
- [2017] NSWDC 136
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the nature of the conversation between Byeon and Mr. Lee, considering whether Byeon's statements could be considered a publication of the defamatory matter to Mr. Lee. The court found that Byeon's conversation with Mr. Lee was a private exchange and did not constitute a publication to the public or to any third party. Consequently, the court held that Byeon was not liable for the initial publication of the defamatory matter. Regarding the republication, the court concluded that the conversation between Mr. Lee and the plaintiff's friends at a different restaurant did not amount to a republication of the matter by Byeon. The court reasoned that the publication by Mr. Lee to the plaintiff's friends was independent of Byeon's initial conversation, and thus, Byeon could not be held liable for the republication.
The court dismissed both claims for publication and republication. The plaintiff's case failed as the court found no evidence that Byeon's actions constituted a publication of the defamatory matter to the public or to any third party. As a result, the court entered judgment in favour of the defendant, with costs reserved with liberty to apply and exhibits retained until further order.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) Judgment for the defendant.
(2) Costs reserved with liberty to apply.
(3) Exhibits retained until further order.
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.