SLEEMAN v NATIONWIDE NEWS PTY LTD [2002] NSWSC 826

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : SLEEMAN v NATIONWIDE NEWS PTY LTD [2002] NSWSC 826 FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 20256 OF 2000 HEARING DATE(S) : 2 September 2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 2 September 2002

RICHARD SLEEMAN (Plaintiff)

PARTIES : v

NATIONWIDE NEWS (Defendant) JUDGMENT OF : Levine J

C Evatt (Plaintiff) COUNSEL : T Blackburn (Defendant) Peter R Murphy & Co (Plaintiff) SOLICITORS : Blake Dawson Waldron (Defendant) CATCHWORDS : Reply - express malice - adequacy of particulars - discovery DECISION : See paragraphs 11, 12 and 13

DLJ:1 Ex tempore revised IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION DEFAMATION list

JUSTICE DAVID LEVINE

MONDAY 2 SEPTEMBER 2002

20256 OF 2000

RICHARD SLEEMAN (Plaintiff)

v

NATIONWIDE NEWS (Defendant)

JUDGMENT (Reply - express malice - adequacy of particulars – discovery) 1 HIS HONOUR: The plaintiff has instituted proceedings against the defendant in respect of a publication that has been dealt with pursuant to s 7A of the Defamation Act. The matter complained of is in the following terms: "Ian Thorpe was treated like a god following his world-record breaking swims at the Olympic trials. At just 17, Thorpedo charmed the public outside the pool, too – with his characteristic modesty and sweet nature. Sadly, the goodwill Ian and his manager, David Flaskas, felt towards the media pack has somewhat diminished after a cover story, The Water God , appeared in Fairfax's Good Weekend . According to the write-off, "Richard Sleeman meets the almost too-good-to-be-true teen with the world at his big, big feet – and discovers his surprising plans for after the Olympics". (Disclosure: Thorpe has a contract to write exclusively for The Australian and was recently interviewed at length by this newspaper's Fiona Harari for a magazine piece.) The background to the Good Weekend article is complex, but the upshot is that Thorpe did not agree to be interviewed for the profile, did not pose for photographs for the magazine and was surprised to discover he had allegedly told the journalist he may retire after Sydney 2000. "He's having a break like all other swimmers," Flaskas says. To be fair, Sleeman did have some access to Thorpe and his family – way back in January - and he did attend press conferences to get the rest of his material. He also snatched poolside conversations with him, of which Flaskas was previously unaware. But according to Flaskas, the piece was dishonest because it was presented as if Sleeman had spoken to Thorpe recently and at length. It is the first, bur probably not the last time the young swimmer has felt exploited". 2 As I understand it, On 9 May 2001 in a trial before Bergin J, the jury found that the matter complained of carried two defamatory imputations: