Mallik v McGeown

In *Mallik v McGeown*, the plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a jury's verdict in a defamation trial. The jury had found that certain imputations conveyed by the defendant's publication, specifically that the plaintiff was "demented," were not defamatory and that these imputations were not conveyed by the publication.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge had misdirected the jury on the test for determining whether an imputation is defamatory, and whether the jury's determinations were ones that no reasonable jury could have reached. The court also considered whether any alleged misdirection or non-direction by the trial judge led to a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice, and whether the judge's directions were sufficient to cure submissions made by the respondents' counsel.

The Court of Appeal, comprising McColl JA, Campbell JA, and Bell JA, dismissed the appeal. The court reasoned that the primary judge's directions on the test for defamation were adequate and that the jury's findings were open to them. The court found no substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice that would warrant a new trial.

The appeal was dismissed with costs. Subsequently, a stay granted in relation to the costs of the s7A trial was lifted.