Jones v Sutton

In Jones v Sutton, the appellant (Jones) appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision of the trial judge concerning defamation proceedings. The dispute involved publications made by the respondent (Sutton) which Jones alleged were defamatory.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was the proper application of the defence under section 13 of the Defamation Act 1974 (NSW). This defence requires the defendant to prove that the matter complained of was not likely to cause harm to the reputation of the plaintiff. The court was also required to consider the relevance of the plaintiff's actual reputation and whether harm was in fact occasioned by the publication, as well as the effect of republication.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that the test under section 13 of the Defamation Act 1974 (NSW) is an objective one, focusing on whether the publication was *likely* to cause harm, irrespective of whether harm was actually occasioned. The court held that the "grapevine effect" and the content of any republication were relevant considerations in assessing this likelihood. Furthermore, the court determined that the plaintiff's existing reputation and the defendant's knowledge of that reputation were relevant to the assessment of whether the publication was likely to cause harm. The onus of proving the section 13 defence rested on the defendant.

The appeal was allowed, the verdict and orders of the trial judge were set aside, and judgment was entered for the appellant, Jones, in varying amounts for different publications. The respondent, Sutton, was ordered to pay the costs at first instance and of the appeal.