Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Gill v HarperCollins Publishers Australia Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 1533 File number: NSD 1621 of 2017
Judgment of: BROMWICH J
Date of judgment: 16 December 2022
Date of publication of reasons: 19 December 2022
Catchwords: DEFAMATION – applicant sought to have certain particulars in respondents' amended defence struck out or pleaded with further specificity – whether some impugned pleadings are too vague, imprecise or ambiguous – whether some pleading particulars are improper – where applicant must prove that the pleadings could not be pleaded and attempted to be proven at trial – held: application dismissed, but some objections to the amended defence conceded by the respondents, and a further amended defence to be filed
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 67 Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) s 10
Cases cited: Australian Broadcasting Corporation v McBride [2001] NSWCA 322; 53 NSWLR 430 Burstein v Times Newspapers Ltd [2001] 1 WLR 579 Herron v HarperCollins Publishers Australia Pty Ltd [2022] FCAFC 68; 400 ALR 56 Herron v HarperCollins Publishers Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] FCAFC 119 Herron v HarperCollins Publishers Australia Pty Ltd (No 3) [2020] FCA 1687 Rush v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] FCA 550; 359 ALR 564 Turner v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 540; [2006] 1 WLR 3469
Division: General Division
Registry: New South Wales
National Practice Area: Other Federal Jurisdiction
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