Gould v Jordan [2020] FCA 1191

Federal Court of Australia

Gould v Jordan [2020] FCA 1191 File number: NSD 1735 of 2017

Judgment of: WHITE J

Date of judgment: 19 August 2020

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – interlocutory application for the separate hearing and determination of issues in defamation proceedings – trial of defences of jurisdictional and contextual truth under ss 28 and 29 of the Uniform Defamation Act likely to be substantial – certain matters indicating that separate hearings may not result in prolongation of the litigation – whether the Respondent has shown there should be departure from the usual course. Held: application granted.

Legislation: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 43(1) Uniform Defamation Act ss 18, 25, 26, 28, 29 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 16.07(2), 30.01

Cases cited: Bywater Investments Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2015] FCAFC 176; (2015) 236 FCR 520 Bywater Investments Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2016] HCA 45; (2016) 260 CLR 169 Goodfellow v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 1152 Guise v Kouvelis (1947) 74 CLR 102 Hua Wang Bank Berhad v Commissioner of Taxation [2014] FCA 1392; (2014) 100 ATR 244 Jordan, Commissioner of Taxation v Second Commissioner of Taxation [2019] FCA 1602 Robson (trustee of Bankrupt Estate of Musgrave) v WJM Investments Pty Ltd, in the matter of WJM Investments Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 2048 Spirits International BV v Federal Treasury Enterprise (FKP) Sojuzplodoimport [2011] FCAFC 69; (2011) 91 IPR 438 State of Western Australia v Galati [2017] FCA 236 Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board [2001] HCA 19; (2001) 206 CLR 1 Thunder Studios Inc (California) v Kazal (No 8) [2018] FCA 1995 Triguboff v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 845