Hall v Hannaford [1999] NSWSC 1197

New South Wales Supreme Court CITATION : Hall v Hannaford [1999] NSWSC 1197 CURRENT JURISDICTION : Common Law FILE NUMBER(S) : 20590 of 1995 HEARING DATE(S) : 29 November 1999 1 December 1999 JUDGMENT DATE : 8 December 1999

TREVOR HALL (Plaintiff)

PARTIES : v

JOHN HANNAFORD (Defendant) JUDGMENT OF : Levine J

J C Gibson (Plaintiff) COUNSEL : B McClintock S.C. (Defendant) Denes Ebner (Plaintiff) SOLICITORS : Crown Solicitors Office (Defendant)

CATCHWORDS : Defamation Act 1974 ss 15 & 16 - contextual imputations - re-consideration of judgment 20 August 1999 (NSWSC 838) ACTS CITED : Defamation Act 1974 (as amended) Allen v John Fairfax & Sons Pty Limited (unreported, 2 December 1988) Hall & Anor v Nationwide News Pty Limited (unreported, 5 November 1998, Levine J) CASES CITED : Perkins v Harris (Court of Appeal, unreported, 26 May 1995) Plato Films Ltd v Spedel [1972] AC 1090 TCN Channel Nine Pty Limited v Antoniadis (1998) 44 NSWLR 682 Waterhouse & Anor v Hickie (1995) Aust Torts Reports 81-347 DECISION : See paragraph 24

DLJ: 5 THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION DEFAMATION LIST No. 205090 of 1995

JUSTICE DAVID LEVINE

WEDNESDAY 8 DECEMBER 1999

TREVOR HALL (Plaintiff)

v

JOHN HANNAFORD (Defendant)

JUDGMENT ( Defamation Act 1974 ss 15 & 16 - contextual imputations - re-consideration of judgment 20 August 1999 (NSWSC 838)) 1 On 20 August 1999 (NSWSC 838: DLJ: 3) I delivered a ruling in relation to then pleaded defence under s 16 of the Defamation Act 1974. 2 The ruling was delivered in the context of an application concerning, inter alia, the adequacy of particulars of justification and comment. It was contended for the plaintiff that the form of the Defence then pleaded by the defendant (see paragraph 43 of the judgment) did not plead an available defence under s 16 of the Act because it "pleaded back" the plaintiff's imputations. The relevant part of my judgment set out in paragraphs 45 to 49 as follows: It seems to me that this submission is well founded. The structure of the defence provided for by s 16 has been considered by the Court of Appeal in Perkins v Harris (26 May 1995); Waterhouse & Anor v Hickie (26 May 1995) (1995) Aust Torts Reports 81-347; and, TCN Channel Pty Limited v Antoniadis (1998) 44 NSWLR 682. I considered the matter in Hall & Anor v Nationwide News Pty Limited (5 November 1998, unreported (DLJ: 2)).