Goldberg v Voigt

In Goldberg v Voigt, the plaintiff, Goldberg, sought to recover damages for defamation caused by statements published by the defendant, Voigt, on Facebook. The defamatory content included serious imputations such as allegations that Goldberg was a killer and a stalker of women, which were made in a closed Facebook group. Despite the limited number of people initially exposed to the post, Goldberg argued that the content had a significant impact due to the nature of the imputations and the potential for further dissemination through the "grapevine effect". The central issue before the court was whether the defendant's belated offer to make amends could influence the assessment of damages. The court had to determine the appropriate level of damages considering the defamatory nature of the statements and their dissemination.

The court addressed whether the defendant's offer to make amends, which came after the proceedings had been initiated, could affect the quantum of damages awarded to the plaintiff. The court examined the seriousness of the defamatory statements and the impact of their dissemination within the closed Facebook group. Despite the limited initial reach, the court recognised the potential for broader dissemination through word of mouth. The court held that the imputations were of a serious nature, with significant potential to cause harm to the plaintiff's reputation. The court concluded that the belated offer to make amends did not warrant a reduction in the damages awarded.

Goldberg was awarded $35,000 in damages for the defamation. The court acknowledged the gravity of the imputations and their potential impact on Goldberg's reputation. The defendant was ordered to pay $8,000 as a fixed sum for the plaintiff's costs incurred in the proceedings from 2019/00294969. The court scheduled a future hearing to address the issue of costs, ensuring that the parties would have an opportunity to present their arguments on this matter.