Qu v Wilks
[2023] VSCA 198
Citation 1
(Para 5)
…legations’ in the matters complained of may fall to be determined at the serious harm hearing was in error. [5] Wilks v Qu (Ruling 2) [2022] VCC 1503 (‘Second Ruling’).…
Jones v Jackson
[2023] NSWDC 76
Citation 2
(Para 22)
…elation to serious harm, as set out in s 10A(4) (“or on the judicial officer’s own motion”), as explained by Clayton J in Wilks v Qu (Ruling 2) [2022] VCC 1503 and High Quality Jewellers Pty Ltd (ACN 119 428 394) & Ors v Ramaihi (Ruling) [2022] VCC 1924 (see GRC Project Pty Ltd trading as GRC Property Management v…
GRC Project Pty Ltd trading as GRC Property Management v Lai
[2023] NSWDC 63
Citation 3
(Para 6)
…(s 10A(5)). The nature of “special circumstances” is set out in Wilks v Qu (Ruling) [2022] VCC 620 at [40]-[46] and ( Wilks v Qu (Ruling 2 ) [2022] VCC 1503 at [6]-[11]).…
Scott v Bodley
[2022] NSWDC 459
Citation 4
(Para 3)
…s and a consideration of the extent to which the serious harm element is linked to other issues for determination ( Wilks v Qu (Ruling 2) [2022] VCC 1503 (“ Wilks v Qu (Ruling 2) ”) at [6] - [11]). As Clayton DCJ noted in Wilks v Qu (Ruling) at [23], there is no English equivalent to s 10A(5), so English decisions…
High Quality Jewellers Pty Ltd (ACN 119 428 394) v Ramaihi (Ruling)
[2022] VCC 1924
Citation 5
…the serious harm element to the trial of the proceeding Legislation Cited: Defamation Act 2005 (Vic), s10A(4)(a) Cases Cited: Wilks v Qu (Ruling 2) [2022] VCC 1503; Newman v Whittington [2022] NSWSC 249; Randell v McLachlain [2022] NSWDC 506; Martin v Najem [2022] NSWDC 479; Scott v Bodley [2022] NSWDC 459 Ruling:…