Rodgers v Gooding

[2023] QDC 115

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION

PARTIES:

Rodgers & Anor v Gooding [2023] QDC 115

MIANKA RODGERS
(First Plaintiff)

AND

MICHAEL USHER

(Second Plaintiff)

V

ZOE ANNE GOODING

(Defendant)

FILE NO:

48 of 2022

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Assessment of Damages

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court

DELIVERED ON:

23 June 2023

DELIVERED AT:

Townsville

HEARING DATE:

In Chambers

JUDGE:

Coker DCJ

ORDER:

1.   That the defendant pay the first plaintiff compensatory damages of $100,000.

2.   That the defendant pay the second plaintiff compensatory damages of $100,000.

3.   That the defendant pay the first plaintiff aggravated damages of $25,000.

4.   That the defendant pay the second plaintiff aggravated damages of $40,000.

5.   That the defendant pay interest on the total of the damages, fixed at the date of judgment in the sum of $14, 179.32.

6.   That the defendant pay the costs of the first and second plaintiff as may be agreed and failing agreement to be taxed. 

CATCHWORDS:

DEFAMATION – STATEMENTS AMOUNTING TO DEFAMATION – where the plaintiffs sue in respect of three posts to a community web page published by the defendant – where the plaintiffs allege that these posts give rise to a defamatory imputation – where the imputation is that they are both paedophiles.

DEFAMATION – where the defendant has admitted by Notice of Voluntary Admission that she was the sole publisher of the posts.

DAMAGES – GENERAL DAMAGES – ASSESSMENT – AGGRAVATION – where the plaintiffs seek general and aggravated damages – whether the conduct of the defendant calls for the awarding of aggravated damages – whether compensatory damages are sufficient in the circumstances.

LEGISLATION:

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) r 187

CASES:

O’Reilly v Edgar [2019] QSC 24
Nowak v Putland [2011] QDC 259
Atholwood v Barrett [2004] QDC 505
Northcoast Childrens Home Incorporated Trading as Child and Adolescent Specialist Programs and Accommodation (CASPA) v Martin [2014] NSWDC 125
Grattan v Porter [2016] QDC 202
Bertwhistle v Conquest [2015] QDC 133
Rothe v Scott (No 4) [2016] NSWDC 160
Rogers v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2003] 216 CLR 327
Cerutti v Crestside Pty Ltd [2014] QCA 33

SOLICITORS:

Conrad Law for the first and second plaintiffs
No appearance by the defendant.

Introduction

1. The plaintiffs in this matter claim damages for defamation against the defendant.  The plaintiffs are Mianka Rodgers and Michael Usher, hereafter referred to as the first and second plaintiffs.  The first defendant is Zoe Anne Gooding.  I shall refer to her during the balance of these reasons as the defendant.  There was at one stage a second defendant, Adam William John Gooding, but as will become obvious during the course of these reasons, the proceedings against the second defendant were not pursued.

2. It is appropriate that I should first place in context the proceedings before the Court, before turning to the actual factual circumstances that exist as well as to the law.  It will hopefully become clear as to why that is necessary as the reasons progress.  The claim in this matter was filed on…