Griffith v ABC [No 1]

In Griffith v ABC [No 1], the dispute arose from an injurious falsehood claim brought by the plaintiff against the defendant, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. The plaintiff, Griffith, sought damages for defamatory statements made by the defendant in a news report, alleging that Griffith had engaged in corrupt conduct. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where the defendant moved for a dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim under Rule 29.10 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether there was sufficient evidence to establish that the plaintiff had suffered special damage as a result of the defamatory statements. In cases of injurious falsehood, special damage is typically required to be proven unless the statement is considered to be actionable per se. The defendant argued that the plaintiff had not provided evidence of any quantifiable harm or loss resulting from the broadcast, and therefore, the claim should be dismissed.

The court considered the evidence presented and concluded that the plaintiff had not demonstrated special damage as a result of the defamatory statements. The court found that while the plaintiff had presented evidence of damage to reputation, this alone was insufficient without evidence of specific financial or other tangible loss. Given the absence of such evidence, the court held that the plaintiff’s claim did not meet the necessary threshold for proceeding to trial. Consequently, the defendant's application for a dismissal was successful.

The court ordered the plaintiff’s injurious falsehood claim to be dismissed. The ruling emphasised the importance of demonstrating quantifiable special damage in defamatory claims, particularly in cases of injurious falsehood, unless the statement is actionable per se.