Goldberg v Randel

Goldberg v Randel is a case heard by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The plaintiff, Goldberg, brought an action for defamation against the defendant, Randel. The plaintiff sought an extension of time in which to file a jury requisition, claiming that Randel's defamation of him was of such a nature that a jury was required to determine the case. Randel opposed the application on the basis that the defamation was not of such a nature as to require a jury, and that the plaintiff had not demonstrated any justification for the delay in filing the requisition.

The court was required to decide whether the defamation was of such a nature that a jury was required to determine the case, and whether the plaintiff had demonstrated any justification for the delay in filing the requisition. The court noted that the nature of the defamation was not, in itself, sufficient to require a jury. The court also found that the plaintiff had not demonstrated any justification for the delay in filing the requisition. The court held that the plaintiff's delay was unreasonable and that the defendant would be prejudiced if the application was granted.

Accordingly, the court dismissed the defendant's application for an extension of time in which to file a jury requisition. The court also ordered that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the application. This decision highlights the importance of timely filing of jury requisitions and the need for a justification for any delay in doing so. It also reinforces the principle that the nature of the defamation is not, in itself, sufficient to require a jury.