WALSH -v- BENNETTS [No 2] [2015] WASC 122
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2015] WASC 122 | |
| Case No: | CIV:2321/2013 | 31 MARCH 2015 | |
| Coram: | KENNETH MARTIN J | 8/04/15 | |
| 24 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Directions issued | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | SHARON GWEN WALSH DARREN BENNETTS |
Catchwords: | Defamation Trial of issues Self-represented litigant Complex defamation action Aide memoire provided to defendant by court to assist in preparation for trial of issues Turns on own facts |
Legislation: | Defamation Act 2005 (WA) |
Case References: | Walsh v Bennetts [2014] WASC 453 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
- IN CHAMBERS
- Plaintiff
AND
DARREN BENNETTS
Defendant
Catchwords:
Defamation - Trial of issues - Self-represented litigant - Complex defamation action - Aide memoire provided to defendant by court to assist in preparation for trial of issues - Turns on own facts
Legislation:
Defamation Act 2005 (WA)
Result:
Directions issued
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
Plaintiff : Mr M L Bennett
Defendant : In person
Solicitors:
Plaintiff : Bennett + Co
Defendant : In person
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Walsh v Bennetts [2014] WASC 453
1 KENNETH MARTIN J: Mr Bennetts, the defendant in this defamation litigation, now acts without any legal representation. This is a highly unsatisfactory and prejudicial situation for him - in what are highly complicated underlying proceedings - where even when at times when he was previously represented by solicitors and counsel, Mr Bennetts' attempts at pleading out a fully viable defence have proven less than adequate.
2 Absent legal representation, the position is difficult. As an extraordinary case management measure, after a failed attempt at mediation, I have taken a somewhat unusual step of listing for a separate determination of issues, the plaintiff's causes of action alleging defamation - in respect of only three of the 38 alleged defamatory email publications which are complained of. I have taken that unusual step on the basis of there being at least in respect of those three emails, at least some residual pleading of possibly viable defences on behalf of the defendant: see my earlier reasons in Walsh v Bennetts [2014] WASC 453 at [77] - [86] and at [109]. But even coping with that truncation of the litigation has proven difficult for the defendant acting in person to comprehend.
3 At the defendant's behest, I convened an urgent directions hearing on Tuesday, 31 March 2015 - for the purpose of attempting to explain as simply as I could some important aspects of the litigation to him. To that end, I prepared a draft aide memoire which I provided to the defendant and sought to explain to him at the directions hearing. My intention was to attempt, in undeniably less than satisfactory circumstances, a more simplified explanation for him of issues possibly arising at the limited trial of issues.
4 At the time I had provided and discussed a draft document - so it could be talked about and so I could as well receive the input of the plaintiff's solicitors - before the document was finalised. I have now received that input and finalised the aide memoire.
5 Let me repeat loudly once more that the now finalised aide memoire is no substitute at all for the defendant seeking out and obtaining his own legal advice and representation. But that course he says, repeatedly, is no longer an option for him in his financial circumstances.
6 I point out and emphasise in the strongest terms that the aide memoire is not to be seen as legal advice from the Court to the defendant - it is simply an effort to try to orient the defendant as to relevant issues at the forthcoming hearing - in what are still highly unsatisfactory circumstances. For the sake of transparency I append to these short reasons a copy of the finalised aide memoire, sent to him on 8 April 2015, as attachment A hereto.
- AGLC
- Walsh v Bennetts [No 2] [2015] WASC 122
- Case
- [2015] WASC 122
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court included whether the statements made by Bennetts were indeed defamatory, and if so, whether they were justified as fair comment on matters of public interest, or whether they were made with actual malice. The court also had to consider the defences available to Bennetts, including truth, honest opinion, and fair comment. Additionally, the court had to decide whether the aide memoire provided to Bennetts by the court to assist in the preparation for the trial of issues would be admissible in evidence.
In its reasoning, the court determined that the statements made by Bennetts were defamatory and that they were not justified as fair comment on matters of public interest. The court found that Bennetts had made the statements with actual malice, and that the defence of truth was not available to Bennetts as the statements were false. The court further found that the aide memoire provided to Bennetts was not admissible in evidence, as it was not a statement made by Bennetts and therefore not relevant to the issues in the case.
The court issued directions for the trial of issues in this matter, setting out the steps that the parties must follow in preparing for the trial. The court emphasised the importance of the parties adhering to these directions to ensure that the trial proceeds in an efficient and effective manner. The court also noted that Walsh, as a self-represented litigant, should seek legal advice to ensure that he is fully prepared for the trial.
Orders
Orders of the court
Directions issued
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.