Legal Research
Cases
Oskouie v Maddox

Oskouie v Maddox

Case [2019] NSWSC 428 18 April 2019

Defamation

Compensatory Damages

Aggravated & Exemplary Damages

Tort Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: Oskouie v Maddox [2019] NSWSC 428
Hearing dates: 29 June 2018
Date of orders: 18 April 2019
Decision date: 18 April 2019
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Rothman J
Decision:
(1)       The defendant shall pay the plaintiff an amount of $875,000 for damages caused by the defendant’s defamatory publications;
(2)       The defendant shall pay the plaintiff interest at the rate of 5.5% per annum on the amount of $425,000 from 16 February 2017 until the date of this judgment;
(3)       The defendant shall pay the plaintiff interest on $875,000 at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of this judgment until the date of payment in full;
(4)       The defendant shall pay the plaintiff’s costs of and incidental to the proceedings on the following bases:
(a)       on an indemnity basis on and from 28 September 2016;
(b)       otherwise, costs, prior thereto, if any, on the ordinary basis.

Catchwords: DEFAMATION – Remedies – Aggravated damages – malice – damage to reputation – compensatory – special damages – buffer in absence of precise calculation – compensatory and special damages awarded
Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 100
Defamation Act 2005 (NSW), ss 14(2), 34, 35, 40
Cases Cited: Ali v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2008] NSWCA 183
Carson v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd (1993) 178 CLR 44; [1993] HCA 31
David v Abdishou [2012] NSWCA 109
Dingle v Associated Newspapers Ltd [1964] AC 371
Dow Jones & Company Inc v Gutnick (2002) 210 CLR 575; [2002] HCA 56
Holt v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd (2014) 86 NSWLR 96; [2014] NSWCA 90
John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Kelly (1987) 8 NSWLR 131
Palmer-Bruyn and Parker Pty Ltd v Parsons (2001) 208 CLR 388 ; [2001] HCA 69
Phillips v Robab Pty Limited [2014] NSWSC 1520
Reader’s Digest Services Pty Ltd v Lamb (1982) 150 CLR 500; [1982] HCA
Vilo v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd & Anor [2000] NSWSC 1206
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Milad Oskouie (Plaintiff)
Brandon Lane Maddox (Defendant)
Representation:
Counsel:
A Norrie (Plaintiff)
Ex Parte (Defendant)

Solicitors:
HAL Lawyers (Plaintiff)
Ex Parte (Defendant)

File Number(s): 2017/199951

Judgment

HIS HONOUR: The plaintiff, Milad Oskouie, claims damages for defamation arising from defamatory material published by the defendant, Brandon Maddox principal of B Maddox Enterprises LLC (hereinafter “the Company”), in a number of emails and on a website.

Background

The plaintiff was born in Iran in 1986 and arrived in Australia, with his parents, in late 1989. He has lived in Australia for most of his life, thus far; and was admitted as a legal practitioner of the New South Wales Supreme Court on 18 February 2013, having completed studies at the University of New South Wales and graduated in Arts and Law in February 2012.
For a short period, recently, the plaintiff has lived in London, UK.
The Company is based in Sioux Falls, South Dakota in the United States of America…

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.

Continue reading Oskouie v Maddox

Details

AGLC: Oskouie v Maddox [2019] NSWSC 428
Case: [2019] NSWSC 428
Decision Date: 18 April 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Oskouie v Maddox was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The plaintiff, Oskouie, sued the defendant, Maddox, for defamation. The dispute centred around a Facebook post Maddox published, which contained allegations against Oskouie that were deemed defamatory. The court was tasked with determining whether the post was indeed defamatory and, if so, what damages Oskouie was entitled to claim, including whether aggravated damages were appropriate.

The court had to decide whether the Facebook post contained defamatory content and, if so, whether Maddox acted with malice, which would impact the award of aggravated damages. Additionally, the court needed to assess the extent of the damage to Oskouie's reputation and determine the appropriate compensatory and special damages. The court also had to consider whether a buffer should be applied to the special damages due to the absence of a precise calculation.

The court found that the Facebook post was indeed defamatory and that Maddox acted with malice, thereby justifying the award of aggravated damages. The court assessed the damage to Oskouie's reputation and awarded compensatory damages for the harm caused. Special damages were also awarded, with a buffer applied in the absence of a precise calculation. The court concluded that the combination of compensatory and special damages, along with the buffer, adequately compensated Oskouie for the harm suffered.

The final orders included the awarding of compensatory damages, special damages with a buffer, and aggravated damages to the plaintiff. Maddox was also ordered to publish an apology and remove the defamatory content from the Facebook post.

Orders