NSW Caselaw
New South Wales District Court
CITATION: Goldberg v Randel [2008] NSWDC 45
HEARING DATE(S): 28 March 2008
JUDGMENT DATE: 28 March 2008
JURISDICTION: Civil
JUDGMENT OF: Gibson DCJ
DECISION: 1. Defendant's application for extension of time in which to file a jury requisition is dismissed. 2. Defendant pay plaintiff's costs of this application.
CATCHWORDS: Tort - defamation - application for extension of time to requisition a jury
Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 56 Defamation Act 1974 (NSW), s 7A LEGISLATION CITED: Defamation Act 2005 (NSW), s 21 District Court Act 1973 (NSW), ss 78 and 79A District Court Rules 1973 (NSW), Part 12 r 5 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), Part 29 r 29.2
Dunsec v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2000] NSWCA 155 Hanrahan v Ainsworth (1990) 22 NSWLR 73 CASES CITED: Itek Graphix Pty Ltd v Elliott (2002) 54 NSWLR 207 Mallik v McGeown [2008] NSWSC 129 Murrihy v Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd (Supreme Court of NSW, 11 December 1998, unreported) Pambula District Hospital v Herriman (1988) 14 NSWLR 387
PARTIES: Plaintiff: Raymond Goldberg Defendant: John Randel
FILE NUMBER(S): 5709 of 2006
COUNSEL: Plaintiff: S Chrysanthou Defendant: R Rasmussen
SOLICITORS: Plaintiff: Kalantzis & Co Defendant: Sally Nash & Co as agents for Bennett & Philp
Introduction 1. The plaintiff commenced proceedings by way of statement of claim filed on 28 November 2006 and served on 4 December 2006 concerning an alleged defamatory email sent to a customer of the plaintiff's in Dubai.
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