Voelte v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No 4)

Case

[2016] NSWSC 1012

21 July 2016


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Voelte v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No 4) [2016] NSWSC 1012 [2016] NSWSC 1012 21 July 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Voelte v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No 4), the plaintiff brought defamation proceedings against the defendant in the Federal Court of Australia. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant broadcast defamatory statements about him on television. The court was required to determine whether the jury should be directed to determine the defamatory meaning of the statements before hearing other evidence in the trial, and whether the jury should be provided with a transcript of the broadcast to assist them in determining the meaning of the statements. The court was also required to consider the issue of costs, in particular whether the plaintiff acted unreasonably in refusing a Calderbank offer made by the defendant before the trial.

The court held that it was desirable for the jury to determine the defamatory meaning of the statements before hearing other evidence in the trial, as this would avoid the risk of the jury being influenced by other evidence in their determination of the meaning. The court also held that it was undesirable to provide the jury with a transcript of the broadcast, as this would be an artificial reconstruction of the broadcast and may not accurately reflect the way in which the statements were received by the audience. The court held that the plaintiff had acted unreasonably in refusing the Calderbank offer, as the value of the offer was difficult to assess but appeared to be significant. The court ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings.

The court's decision highlights the importance of considering the timing and form of evidence in defamation proceedings, and the potential consequences of refusing a Calderbank offer. The court's reasoning in relation to the desirability of having the jury determine the defamatory meaning before hearing other evidence is particularly relevant to future defamation cases tried with a jury. The court's decision also emphasises the need for parties to carefully consider the value of Calderbank offers before refusing them.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Defamation Law

Legal Concepts

  • Defamation

  • Jury Instructions

  • Costs

  • Calderbank Offer

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

4

Statutory Material Cited

5

Nu-Tec v ABC [2010] NSWSC 711