FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Palmer v McGowan [2021] FCA 430
Table of Corrections 27 May 2021 In the last dot point in paragraph 15, the word “relies” is inserted between the words “plaintiff” and “did”. 27 May 2021 In paragraph 75, the word “continued” is replaced with “combined”. ORDERS
NSD 912 of 2020 BETWEEN: CLIVE FREDERICK PALMER
Applicant
AND: MARK MCGOWAN
Respondent
AND BETWEEN: MARK MCGOWAN
Cross-Claimant
AND: CLIVE FREDERICK PALMER
Cross-Respondent
ORDER MADE…
Continue reading Palmer v McGowan
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Palmer v McGowan [2021] FCA 430
- Case
- [2021] FCA 430
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Palmer v McGowan involved a defamation claim brought by Mr Palmer against Mr McGowan. The dispute centred around the ninth impugned matter, a series of statements made by Mr Palmer, which were argued to contain defamatory imputations about Mr McGowan. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The court was tasked with determining whether certain contextual imputations identified in the defence of Mr McGowan were valid and whether they differed from the imputations pleaded by Mr Palmer or exceeded the "sting" alleged by him. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether these contextual imputations were vague and embarrassing, potentially rendering them inadmissible.
The court meticulously examined the statements in question, particularly highlighting the need to discern whether the imputations were reasonably capable of conveying the contextual allegations made by Mr McGowan. The court found that certain contextual imputations did not arise from the impugned matters in a manner that was arguable or reasonable. Specifically, the court concluded that the imputation that Mr McGowan was a dishonourable man could not be reasonably inferred from the statements made by Mr Palmer. Consequently, several contextual imputations were struck out as they either did not arise from the impugned matters or were not reasonably capable of being inferred. The court also dismissed the remaining applications in the interlocutory application, leaving the matter open for further proceedings regarding costs.
The court's decision resulted in the striking out of specific contextual imputations that were found not to be arguable or reasonably capable of being inferred from the statements. The remaining applications were dismissed, allowing the defamation claim to proceed with the remaining issues. The court indicated that it would hear from the parties regarding the allocation of costs associated with the interlocutory application.
In summary, the court struck out certain contextual imputations that were deemed not arguable or reasonably inferable from the impugned statements. It dismissed the remaining applications and indicated that it would address costs in a subsequent hearing. The decision ensures that the defamation claim will proceed with the remaining valid imputations, while invalidating those that were not reasonably capable of being inferred from the statements.
The court meticulously examined the statements in question, particularly highlighting the need to discern whether the imputations were reasonably capable of conveying the contextual allegations made by Mr McGowan. The court found that certain contextual imputations did not arise from the impugned matters in a manner that was arguable or reasonable. Specifically, the court concluded that the imputation that Mr McGowan was a dishonourable man could not be reasonably inferred from the statements made by Mr Palmer. Consequently, several contextual imputations were struck out as they either did not arise from the impugned matters or were not reasonably capable of being inferred. The court also dismissed the remaining applications in the interlocutory application, leaving the matter open for further proceedings regarding costs.
The court's decision resulted in the striking out of specific contextual imputations that were found not to be arguable or reasonably capable of being inferred from the statements. The remaining applications were dismissed, allowing the defamation claim to proceed with the remaining issues. The court indicated that it would hear from the parties regarding the allocation of costs associated with the interlocutory application.
In summary, the court struck out certain contextual imputations that were deemed not arguable or reasonably inferable from the impugned statements. It dismissed the remaining applications and indicated that it would address costs in a subsequent hearing. The decision ensures that the defamation claim will proceed with the remaining valid imputations, while invalidating those that were not reasonably capable of being inferred from the statements.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The Contextual Imputations 11, 15, 16, 19, 21, 27 and 29 pleaded in the Cross‑Respondent’s defence are struck out.
2. The remaining applications in the interlocutory application of the Cross‑Claimant filed on 9 November 2020 are dismissed.
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
The ninth impugned matter, in the form presented to the Court, comprises 30 paragraphs of statements by Mr Palmer. They are too long to repeat in these reasons. Counsel for Mr Palmer submitted that the cumulative effect of Mr Palmer’s statements, especially [6], [9], [21] and [22], were capable of conveying Contextual Imputation 29. I have read, and reread, the ninth impugned matter but have not been able to discern on even an arguable basis that an imputation that Mr McGowan was a dishonourable man was being conveyed. Accordingly, Contextual Imputation 29 will be struck out. Conclusion In summary, for the reasons given above, Contextual Imputations 11, 15, 16, 19, 21, 27 and 29 are struck out. In addition, as noted, Contextual Imputations 7 and 22 are not pursued. The remaining applications in the interlocutory application of 9 November 2020 are dismissed. I will hear from the parties with respect to costs.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.