Rader v Haines

Rader v Haines was a defamation case heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff, Rader, sought damages from the defendants, Haines and her employer, alleging that Haines had sent an email to Rader’s parents in England that defamed him. The email contained information about the Anti-Violence Order (ADVO) proceedings that had arisen following the breakdown of Rader and Haines' marriage, which the plaintiff claimed had caused him serious harm.

The primary legal issues for the court to decide were whether the email constituted defamation under the Defamation Act 2013 (UK), whether the email was protected by the doctrine of qualified privilege at common law, whether the email was published on a protected occasion, whether there was malice, and whether the company employing Haines was vicariously liable for the email sent by Haines using the company’s email account. The court also had to consider the appropriate measure of damages if the plaintiff succeeded in his claim.

The court found that the email did not constitute defamation as it was not published to a third party and therefore did not meet the requirements of the Defamation Act 2013 (UK). The court also found that the email was protected by the doctrine of qualified privilege at common law as it was sent in the context of a family dispute and was therefore a matter of public interest. The court further found that there was no malice and that the company employing Haines was not vicariously liable for the email as it was sent outside the scope of Haines' employment.

The court therefore dismissed the plaintiff’s claim and ordered that the names of the parties be suppressed and replaced with pseudonyms adopted in the judgment. The court also ordered that judgment be entered for the defendants and that costs be reserved, with liberty to apply.