LOO v RURAL PRESS PTY LTD [2003] NSWSC 107

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : LOO v RURAL PRESS PTY LTD [2003] NSWSC 107 HEARING DATE(S) : 20 February 2003 JUDGMENT DATE : 20 February 2003

JUDGMENT OF : Levine J DECISION : 1. I hold that the sets of imputations to which reference has been made about, do differ in substance, and I also hold the same having been raised by consent pursuant to SCR Pt 31 r 2, that each of the imputations is capable of being carried by the matters complained of and is capable of being defamatory.; 2. It thus seems to me appropriate that this matter forthwith be referred to the list to be called up for a 7A trial.; 3. I direct the defendant within 14 days to file its defence to those issues to be determined by the jury in the trial pursuant to s 7A of the Defamation Act.; 4. Pursuant to Pt 31 r 2, I order that there be a trial by jury of the issues of fact to be determined by that tribunal under s7A of the Defamation Act.; 5. I direct that the matter be placed in the list for calling up for fixing of the date for that trial, and I direct that upon such date being fixed, no later than 14 days prior thereto, the parties have exchanged outlines of evidence in relation to the two innuendo cases.; 6. I also direct that no later than 14 days prior to the date fixed for the 7A trial, the defendant inform the plaintiff whether or not there will be in issue the fact that the defendant published the four publications relied upon. Any such admission as to publication of the articles will not be an admission by the defendant that the material it published carried the pleaded imputations or that they were defamatory.; 7. The defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs.

CATCHWORDS : Imputations - difference in substance - test - "suspicion" imputations - identity of holders of suspicion CASES CITED : Singleton v John Fairfax & Sons Limited, (unreported, 20 February 1980) RONALD LOO (Plaintiff)