Reported Decision: 75 NSWLR 216[2010] ALMD 6440[2010] ALMD 6364
New South Wales
Court of Appeal
CITATION: Naoum v Dannawi [2009] NSWCA 253 HEARING DATE(S): 14 August 2009
JUDGMENT DATE:
21 August 2009JUDGMENT OF: Beazley JA at 1; McColl JA at 2; Macfarlan JA at 39 DECISION: Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs CATCHWORDS: EQUITY – equitable remedies – injunctions – permanent injunction sought to restrain publication of allegedly defamatory matter – no hearing of substantive issues sought – necessity for final hearing before grant of permanent injunction LEGISLATION CITED: Defamation Act 2005 (NSW)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)CATEGORY: Principal judgment CASES CITED: Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd [2001] HCA 63; (2001) 208 CLR 199
Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O’Neill [2006] HCA 46; (2006) 227 CLR 57
Bonnard v Perryman [1891] 2 Ch 269
Chappell v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd (1988) 14 NSWLR 153
Church of Scientology v Reader’s Digest Services Pty Ltd [1980] 1 NSWLR 344
Commodore Business Machines Pty Ltd v Trade Practices Commission (1990) 92 ALR 563
House v R [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499
John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd v Rivkin [2003] HCA 50; (2003) 77 ALJR 1657
Lewis v Daily Telegraph [1964] AC 234
Stocker v McElhinney (No 2) [1961] NSWR 1043
Y & Z v W [2007] NSWCA 329; (2007) 70 NSWLR 377TEXTS CITED: R Meagher, J Heydon, M Leeming, Meagher, Gummow and Lehane’s Equity Doctrines and Remedies, 4th ed, (2002), Butterworths Lexis Nexis P W Young, Declaratory Orders, 2nd ed (1984) Butterworths PARTIES: Robert Naoum – Applicant
Nabil Zafer Dannawi - Respondent
FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40284/09 COUNSEL: C A Evatt with S Milanovic - Applicant
S Chrysanthou with P A Maddigan – RespondentSOLICITORS: Cadmus Lawyers – Applicant
Mitry Lawyers - Respondent
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Supreme Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): SC 20373/09 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Harrison J LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 12 August 2009
CA 40284/09
SC 20373/09Friday 21 August 2009BEAZLEY JA
McCOLL JA
MACFARLAN JA
1 BEAZLEY JA: I agree with McColl JA.
2 McCOLL JA: Robert Naoum, the Consul General for Lebanon in Sydney, the applicant, moved in the Supreme Court for orders, among others, restraining Nabil Zafer Dannawi, the respondent, from further publishing allegedly defamatory material on his website and restraining him from causing that material to be posted or published on any other website or on the internet.
3 Pursuant to Practice Note SC CL 4(25) the application for an injunction, being an application against publication of defamatory matter, was made in the Common Law Division rather than the Equity Division. The proceedings came before Patten AJ on 5 August 2009 on which occasion both parties were represented, the applicant by Mr C Evatt and the respondent by Mr P H Maddigan. Although the application was opposed, his Honour made the following orders:
“1. The defendant be restrained from…
Continue reading Naoum v Dannawi
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Naoum v Dannawi [2009] NSWCA 253
- Case
- [2009] NSWCA 253
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether a permanent injunction could be granted to restrain the publication of allegedly defamatory material in circumstances where the substantive issues of the defamation claim had not been heard and determined.
The Court of Appeal held that a permanent injunction is a final remedy and, as such, requires a final determination of the substantive issues in the underlying cause of action. The Court reasoned that to grant a permanent injunction without such a determination would be to grant final relief without the necessary findings of fact and law. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.