Nationwide News Pty Limited v Rush

Case [2018] FCAFC 70

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Nationwide News Pty Limited v Rush [2018] FCAFC 70

Appeal from: Application for leave to appeal: Rush v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 357
File number: NSD 493 of 2018
Judges: ALLSOP CJ, RARES AND LEE JJ
Date of judgment: 27 April 2018
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for leave to appeal – defamation – primary judge struck out paragraphs of statutory qualified privilege defence – primary judge concluded that it was not reasonably arguable that objective truth of facts pleaded in impugned paragraphs could bear on reasonableness of publication – no sufficient doubt demonstrated – leave to appeal refused
Legislation:

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), Pt VB, s 37M

Defamation Act 1974 (NSW), s 22 (repealed)

Defamation Act 2005 (NSW), s 30

Cases cited:

Adam P. Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Philip Morris Inc [1981] HCA 39; 148 CLR 170

Austin v Mirror Newspapers Ltd [1986] AC 299

Branir Pty Ltd v Owston Nominees (No 2) Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1833; 117 FCR 424

Decor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc [1991] FCA 844; 33 FCR 397

Expense Reduction Analysts Group Pty Ltd v Armstrong Strategic Management and Marketing Pty Limited [2013] HCA 46; 250 CLR 303

Goodfellow v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited [2017] FCA 1152

Hockey v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 652; 237 FCR 33

In re the Will of F. B. Gilbert (Deceased) (1946) 46 SR (NSW) 318

Makim v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd (1990) A Def R 50-075

Melbourne City Investments Pty Ltd v Treasury Wine Estates Ltd [2017] FCAFC 98; 252 FCR 1

Rawson Finances Pty Ltd v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation [2010] FCAFC 139; 81 ATR 36
Date of hearing: 27 April 2018
Registry: New South Wales
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Other Federal Jurisdiction
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 20
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr T Blackburn SC with Ms L Barnett
Solicitor for the Applicants: Ashurst
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr R McHugh SC with Ms S Chrysanthou and Mr N Olson
Solicitor for the Respondent: HWL Ebsworth

ORDERS

NSD 493 of 2018
BETWEEN:

NATIONWIDE NEWS PTY LIMITED

First Applicant

JONATHON MORAN

Second Applicant
AND:

GEOFFREY ROY RUSH

Respondent

JUDGES:

ALLSOP CJ, RARES AND LEE JJ

DATE OF ORDER:

27 APRIL 2018

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application for leave to appeal filed 3 April 2018 be dismissed with costs.

Note:   Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Revised from the transcript)

ALLSOP CJ:

  1. I will ask Lee J to deliver the first judgment on the leave application.

    LEE J:

  2. The principles informing the determination of whether to grant leave to appeal from a decision of a single judge of this Court are not novel. The starting point is that in exercising the power to grant leave, regard must be had to the statutory charge in s…

Continue reading Nationwide News Pty Limited v Rush

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Nationwide News Pty Limited v Rush [2018] FCAFC 70
Case
[2018] FCAFC 70
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendants, Nationwide News Pty Limited and others, sought leave to appeal against a decision of the primary judge in a defamation action brought by Mr Rush. The primary judge had dismissed the defendants' defence of statutory qualified privilege on the basis that it was not reasonably arguable that the objective truth of the facts pleaded in certain paragraphs could bear on the reasonableness of the publication. The application for leave to appeal was brought before the court, which had to determine whether the defendants had demonstrated a sufficient doubt about the primary judge's conclusion.

The court was required to assess whether there was a reasonably arguable case that the objective truth of the facts pleaded in the impugned paragraphs could have a bearing on the reasonableness of the publication. Additionally, the court had to determine if the defendants had demonstrated a sufficient doubt about the primary judge's conclusion, which would warrant granting leave to appeal.

The court found that the defendants had not demonstrated a sufficient doubt about the primary judge's conclusion. The court held that the primary judge's reasoning was sound, and the defendants had not provided any compelling arguments to suggest that the primary judge had erred in his assessment. The court also found that the defendants had not shown that the outcome of the case was likely to be different if the appeal were to proceed. As a result, the court dismissed the application for leave to appeal and ordered that the defendants pay the costs of the application.

The court dismissed the application for leave to appeal and ordered that the defendants pay the costs of the application. The defendants were not granted permission to appeal the primary judge's decision, and the dismissal of the application for leave to appeal with costs was entered in accordance with Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The application for leave to appeal filed 3 April 2018 be dismissed with costs.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

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.