Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Edwards v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] FCA 1332 File number: NSD 129 of 2022
Judgment of: WIGNEY J
Date of judgment: 8 November 2022
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application by respondent to amend defence – consideration of applicable principles on grant of leave to amend – proposed amendments raise new justification defence, new contextual imputation and new or amended particulars – application by respondent to cross-examine applicant on discovery affidavit – potential prejudice to applicant if proposed amendments allowed – considerations of imminent trial date and delay – leave to make certain amendments granted – application to cross-examine on discovery affidavit dismissed
Legislation: Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) ss 25, 26
Cases cited: Channel Seven Adelaide Pty Ltd v Manock (2010) 273 LSJS 70; [2010] SASCFC 59 Edwards v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 509 Guy Carpenter & Company Pty Ltd v Grove (No 2) [2011] FCA 1190 Procter v Kalivis (2009) 263 ALR 461; [2009] FCA 1518 Rush v Nationwide News Proprietary Limited (No 2) [2018] FCA 550 Rush v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (2018) 359 ALR 473; [2018] FCA 357 Rush v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 6) [2018] FCA 1851 Spyer v Cuddles 'N' Mum (Franchise) Pty Ltd (No 3) [2002] FCA 1563 Voxson Pty Ltd v Telstra Corporation Ltd (No 10) (2018) 134 IPR 99; [2018] FCA 376
Division: General Division
Registry: New South Wales
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate