VINON HOLDINGS PTY LTD & ANOR -v- MARTIN & ORS [2001] WASC 260

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2001] WASC 260
Case No:	CIV:1539/2001	Heard:	27 SEPTEMBER 2001
Coram:	HASLUCK J	Delivered:	5/10/01
No of pages:	12	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application allowed in part
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	VINON HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 090 137 849) ROBERT ANTHONY ZANON BEN MARTIN BEN HARVEY WEST AUSTRALIAN NEWSPAPERS LTD
Catchwords:	Defamation Application to strike out Issues concerning identification and the form of the pleaded imputations Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Rules of the Supreme Court, O 20 r 19(1)(a)
Case References:	Consolidated Trust Co Ltd v Browne (1948) 49 SR (NSW) 86 David Syme & Co v Canavan (1918) 25 CLR 234 Interval Resort Networks (A/Asia) Pty Ltd v West Australian Newspapers Ltd [1999] WASC 2 Jones v E Hulton & Co [1909] 2 KB 444 Jones v Skelton [1963] 1 WLR 1362 Monte v Mirror Newspapers Ltd [1979] 2 NSWLR 663 Slatyer v Daily Telegraph Newspaper Co Ltd (1908) 6 CLR 1 Sungravure Pty Ltd v Middle East Airlines Airliban SAL (1975) 124 CLR 1 Taylor v Jecks (1993) 10 WAR 309 Barclay v Cox [1968] VR 664 Emerson v Walker & Ors [1999] WASC 265 Gardiner v Ray [1999] WASC 140 Heytesbury Holdings Pty Ltd v City of Subiaco (1998) 19 WAR 440 Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1964] AC 234 Loughans v Odhams Press Ltd [1963] 1 QB 299 Mickelberg v 6PR Southern Cross Radio Pty Ltd [2001] WASC 33 Mirror Newspapers Ltd v Harrison (1982) 149 CLR 293 World Hosts Pty Ltd v Mirror Newspapers Ltd [1978] 1 NSWLR 189

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

CITATION : VINON HOLDINGS PTY LTD & ANOR -v- MARTIN & ORS [2001] WASC 260 CORAM : HASLUCK J HEARD : 27 SEPTEMBER 2001 DELIVERED : 5 OCTOBER 2001 FILE NO/S : CIV 1539 of 2001 BETWEEN : VINON HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 090 137 849)

First Plaintiff

ROBERT ANTHONY ZANON

Second Plaintiff

AND

BEN MARTIN

First Defendant

BEN HARVEY

Second Defendant

WEST AUSTRALIAN NEWSPAPERS LTD

Third Defendant

Catchwords:

Defamation - Application to strike out - Issues concerning identification and the form of the pleaded imputations - Turns on own facts

(Page 2)

Legislation:

Rules of the Supreme Court, O 20 r 19(1)(a)

Result:

Application allowed in part

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

First Plaintiff : Mr R W Richardson

Second Plaintiff : Mr R W Richardson

First Defendant : Ms C Galati

Second Defendant : Ms C Galati

Third Defendant : Ms C Galati

Solicitors:

First Plaintiff : A C Thorpe

Second Plaintiff : A C Thorpe

First Defendant : Edwards Wallace

Second Defendant : Edwards Wallace

Third Defendant : Edwards Wallace

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Consolidated Trust Co Ltd v Browne (1948) 49 SR (NSW) 86
David Syme & Co v Canavan (1918) 25 CLR 234
Interval Resort Networks (A/Asia) Pty Ltd v West Australian Newspapers Ltd [1999] WASC…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Vinon Holdings Pty Ltd v MARTIN and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2001] WASC 260
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Vinon Holdings Pty Ltd and Robert Anthony Zanon sought to bring a defamation claim against Ben Martin, Ben Harvey, and West Australian Newspapers Ltd in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants published two articles in The West Australian, suggesting that Vinon Holdings Pty Ltd, trading as New Age Security, had links to the Coffin Cheaters, a bikie gang. The defendants filed an application to strike out certain paragraphs of the statement of claim on the grounds that they failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action and would prejudice, embarrass, or delay the fair trial of the action. The legal issues before the court were whether the pleaded imputations arose from the words complained of, whether the words were capable of conveying a meaning defamatory of the plaintiffs, and whether the plaintiffs had sufficiently identified themselves in the statement of claim. The court found that the plaintiffs had sufficiently identified themselves in the statement of claim, as the articles mentioned the second plaintiff, Robert Zanon, as the managing director of New Age Security. The court also found that the imputations pleaded were capable of arising from the words complained of and were capable of conveying a meaning defamatory of the plaintiffs. However, the court struck out paragraphs 8.2 and 8.3 of the statement of claim as they were not capable of being conveyed by the matter complained of and were not defamatory of the plaintiffs. The court allowed the application in part and struck out the specified paragraphs of the statement of claim.

Orders