MTQ HOLDINGS PTY LTD -v- LYNCH & ORS [2006] WASC 53

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2006] WASC 53
Case No:	CIV:2557/2004	Heard:	21 FEBRUARY 2006
Coram:	MASTER NEWNES	Delivered:	31/03/06
No of pages:	11	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	MTQ HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 104 520 934) RAYMOND JOHN LYNCH JOHN JOSEPH LINDEN CHARLES JUSTIN BRIAN BIRMINGHAM JOHN LEEDERT NOORDHOEK RCR TOMLINSON LTD (ABN 81 008 898 486)
Catchwords:	Defamation Application to strike out statement of claim Whether imputations capable of being conveyed by words complained of Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Nil
Case References:	Buckeridge v Walter [2006] WASCA 22 Chakravarti v Advertiser Newspapers Ltd (1998) 193 CLR 519 Favell v Queensland Newspapers Pty Ltd (2005) 79 ALJR 1716 Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1964] AC 234 MTQ Holdings Pty Ltd v Lynch [2005] WASC 162 Nil

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

CITATION : MTQ HOLDINGS PTY LTD -v- LYNCH & ORS [2006] WASC 53 CORAM : MASTER NEWNES HEARD : 21 FEBRUARY 2006 DELIVERED : 31 MARCH 2006 FILE NO/S : CIV 2557 of 2004 BETWEEN : MTQ HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 104 520 934)

Plaintiff

AND

RAYMOND JOHN LYNCH

JOHN JOSEPH LINDEN

CHARLES JUSTIN BRIAN BIRMINGHAM

JOHN LEEDERT NOORDHOEK

First Defendants

RCR TOMLINSON LTD (ABN 81 008 898 486)

Second Defendant

Catchwords:

Defamation - Application to strike out statement of claim - Whether imputations capable of being conveyed by words complained of - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Nil

(Page 2)

Result:

Application dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiff : Mr M L Bennett

First Defendants : Mr D M Stone

Second Defendant : Mr D M Stone

Solicitors:

Plaintiff : Bennett & Co

First Defendants : Williams & Hughes

Second Defendant : Williams & Hughes

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Buckeridge v Walter [2006] WASCA 22
Chakravarti v Advertiser Newspapers Ltd (1998) 193 CLR 519
Favell v Queensland Newspapers Pty Ltd (2005) 79 ALJR 1716
Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1964] AC 234
MTQ Holdings Pty Ltd v Lynch [2005] WASC 162

Case(s) also cited:

Nil

(Page 3)

1 MASTER NEWNES: This an application to strike out the statement of claim as disclosing no reasonable cause of action or, alternatively, as being embarrassing. The defendants contend that no reasonable reader of the words complained of, having knowledge of the extrinsic facts pleaded, would understand the words to bear the meanings pleaded or any defamatory meaning.

The plaintiff's claim

2 The matter has previously come before me on a similar application when it was ordered that the defamatory imputation pleaded by the plaintiff be struck out: MTQ Holdings Pty Ltd v Lynch[2005] WASC 162.

3 I will, however, for convenience, set out again the publication complained of and the relevant extrinsic facts.

4 The plaintiff pleads in par 6 of the statement of claim that, on or about 25 November 2004, the first defendants published of and concerning…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read MTQ Holdings Pty Ltd v Lynch and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2006] WASC 53
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Western Australia heard an application to strike out a statement of claim in a defamation case brought by MTQ Holdings Pty Ltd against several defendants, including Raymond John Lynch and others. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants defamed it through a letter published to shareholders of RCR Tomlinson Ltd, claiming that the plaintiff had lied to the shareholders. The defendants argued that the words complained of did not convey the defamatory meanings as pleaded and that the pleading was embarrassing. The court had to decide whether the imputations alleged in the statement of claim were capable of being conveyed by the words complained of and whether they were sufficiently distinct from each other. The court held that it was arguable that a reasonable reader could understand the words complained of to mean that the plaintiff had not been frank and that it was deliberately misleading shareholders. The court found the imputations to be sufficiently distinct and dismissed the application to strike out the statement of claim. The court did not address the issue of costs in its judgment.

Orders