McMahon v John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd (No 7)

The case of McMahon v John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd (No 7) involved a plaintiff who was bankrupt at the time of the publication of allegedly defamatory articles by the defendants, and also at the time the proceedings were initiated. The plaintiff sought damages for defamation, including special damages. The defendants argued that the plaintiff had no standing to bring the proceedings as the right to prosecute the action had vested in the trustee in bankruptcy. The defendants also contested the plaintiff's claim for special damages and raised the issue of truth as a defence to some of the imputations made in the articles.

The court was required to determine whether the plaintiff had standing to bring the proceedings, particularly with respect to the claim for special damages, and whether the right to prosecute the action had vested in the trustee in bankruptcy. The court also needed to consider the defendants' defence of truth and assess the damages, particularly the special damages claimed by the plaintiff. The court had to balance the truth defence with the contextual imputations and determine the appropriate approach to assessing damages, including aggravated damages.

The court found that the issue of the plaintiff's standing was not pleaded in the defence but was raised after the conclusion of the jury trial and the hearing as to damages. The court considered the defendants' application for leave to re-open the proceedings to submit that the plaintiff had no standing. The court exercised its discretion to grant leave to re-open the case, considering factors such as the timing of the application, the potential prejudice to the defendants, and the importance of the issue of standing. The court held that the plaintiff did not have standing to bring the proceedings for special damages, as the right to prosecute the action had vested in the trustee in bankruptcy. Regarding the assessment of damages, the court found that the defendants were successful in establishing the truth of some of the plaintiff's imputations and contextual imputations. The court reduced the damages awarded to the plaintiff, taking into account the truth defence and the need to balance it with the other factors in assessing the overall damages.

The court ordered that the plaintiff's claim for special damages be dismissed. The court also ordered that the claim for aggravated damages be reduced, reflecting the findings on the truth defence and the overall assessment of damages. The court did not order any further costs in relation to the application to re-open the proceedings, considering the circumstances of the case.