Landrey v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd

In this case, the appellant, Landrey, sought an extension of the one-year limitation period within which to commence an action in defamation against the respondents, Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd. The appellant argued that it was not reasonable for him to have commenced the defamation proceeding within the primary one-year limitation period due to the ongoing criminal proceedings related to the same transactions. The respondents opposed the application, and the primary judge dismissed the appellant's application for an extension of time.

The central legal issue was whether the primary judge erred in failing to hold, in light of the ongoing criminal proceedings, that it was not reasonable for the appellant to have commenced a defamation proceeding within one year of publication of the allegedly defamatory matter. The court applied the principles established in Joukhador v Network Ten Pty Ltd [2021] FCAFC 37; 283 FCR 1 and considered the legislative context of the short time limit of one year within which to commence a defamation proceeding.

The Full Court found that it was not reasonable for the appellant to have commenced a defamation proceeding within the primary one-year limitation period, given the ongoing criminal proceedings. The appellant's conduct in pursuing and defending litigation related to the impugned transactions, as well as being properly advised not to commence civil proceedings while the criminal proceedings remained on foot, contributed to the conclusion that the primary judge erred in dismissing the application for an extension of time.

The appeal was allowed, and the orders made were as follows:

1. The appeal is allowed.
2. Orders 1 and 2 of the orders made in proceeding NSD809/2022 on 27 January 2023 are set aside, and in lieu thereof it is ordered that:
(a) The applicant is granted an extension of the limitation period in which to commence the proceeding, pursuant to s 56A of the Limitation Act 1969 (NSW), up to and including the date of filing of the originating application being 21 September 2022.
(b) The respondents pay the applicant's costs of the interlocutory application for an extension of time.
3. The respondents pay the appellant's costs of the application for leave to appeal, and of the appeal.