TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd v Pahuja

The appeal in *TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd v Pahuja* concerned a defamation action heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The appellant, TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd, sought to appeal a judgment delivered by McCallum J. The core of the dispute revolved around the defence of substantial truth, as provided for under section 25 of the *Defamation Act 2005* (NSW).

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the trial judge had erred in withdrawing the defence of substantial truth from the jury. This involved determining whether there was sufficient evidence presented at trial to support a finding that the imputations conveyed by the defamatory material were substantially true. The court also considered the relevance of the plaintiff's implausible denials to the assessment of substantial truth and discussed the principles of contextual truth, referencing the decision in *Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd v Kermode*.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge had erred in withdrawing the defence of substantial truth. The court reasoned that there was evidence upon which a jury could have found that the imputations were substantially true, and that the plaintiff's denials were not so implausible as to warrant the withdrawal of the defence. The court applied the principles established in *Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd v Kermode* regarding the assessment of substantial truth and contextual truth.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the previous orders, and ordered a new trial of the matter. The costs of the first trial were to be determined in the course of the new trial, and the respondent was ordered to pay the appellants’ costs in the Court of Appeal, with a certificate granted under the *Suitors’ Fund Act 1951* (NSW).