Sands v State of South Australia

In *Sands v State of South Australia*, the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia considered an application for permission to appeal a decision of a single Judge. The dispute concerned a defamation action where the defendant sought to amend its defence to include further particulars supporting pleas of justification and qualified privilege. The plaintiff sought to appeal the Judge's decision to permit this amendment, arguing it would lead to a "trial by ambush" and that the material was insufficient to establish a case for the defendant.

The Full Court was required to determine four key legal issues. Firstly, whether the redaction of a record of interview rendered it unusable to support the plea of justification and if allowing the amended defence would result in a trial by ambush. Secondly, whether the trial Judge erred in not striking out the plea of justification due to insufficient material to establish a case for the plaintiff to answer on a charge of murder. Thirdly, whether the trial Judge should have struck out the plea of qualified privilege. Finally, the Court considered whether the assertion of public interest immunity, combined with the plea of justification, would prevent a fair trial.

The Court expressed caution regarding granting permission to appeal on interlocutory pleading matters, noting the potential for further delay. Regarding the first issue, the Court found that the redacted record of interview was not the sole basis for the plea of justification and that the material was capable of supporting the defence, thus not constituting a "trial by ambush." On the second and third issues, the Court held that the matters pleaded were reasonably arguable and capable of sustaining the pleas of justification and qualified privilege, respectively. The Court also found it difficult to make a decision in the plaintiff's favour on the fourth issue at that stage of the proceedings.