WEBSTERS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD v NATIONWIDE NEWS PTY LTD [2003] NSWSC 322

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : WEBSTERS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD v NATIONWIDE NEWS PTY LTD [2003] NSWSC 322 HEARING DATE(S) : 14 April 2003 JUDGMENT DATE : 17 April 2003

JUDGMENT OF : Levine J DECISION : 1. Imputation 4(b) is struck out.; 2. Imputations 4(a), (c), (d) and (e) are capable of being carried by the matter complained of and are capable of being defamatory.; 3. Within 14 days of today the defendant is to file its defence as to issues to be determined by the jury pursuant to s7A of the Defamation Act 1974.; 4. Pursuant to SCR Pt 31 r 2 I order the trial by jury of issues joined on the pleadings as provided for by s7A of the Defamation Act 1974.; 5. I place the action in the List to be called up for s7A jury trial.

CATCHWORDS : Imputations - capacity - form WEBSTERS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (Plaintiff)

PARTIES : v

NATIONWIDE NEWS PTY LTD (Defendant) FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 20502 OF 2002 P Gray (Plaintiff) COUNSEL : D Sibtain (Defendant) Turner Whelan (Plaintiff) SOLICITORS : Gallagher de Reszke (Defendant)

[2003] NSWSC 322 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION DEFAMATION LIST

JUSTICE DAVID LEVINE

THURSDAY 17 APRIL 2003

20502 OF 2002 WEBSTERS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (Plaintiff)

v

nationwide news pty ltd (Defendant)

JUDGMENT (Imputations – capacity – form) 1 The corporate plaintiff by a statement of claim filed on 4 November 2002 sues the defendant in respect of a publication in "The Australian" of 13 March 2002. The publication is such that it cannot practicably be reproduced with these reasons. 2 The material complained of was published over two pages. For present purposes it can be divided into three parts. The first is part is pictorial and is made up of a collage of photographic representations of persons, institutions, seals and relevantly, two photographs of the plaintiff's establishment, one on each side of a photograph of a dry cleaning store. That collage bears the headline "Mail-order bachelors". Beneath that first collage is the second component of the publication which has in its margins "The market for phony degrees is booming, writes Patrick Lawnham" and "Dippy diplomas: Fringe university business extends from unaccredited, but earned degrees like those through Webster's, to email scams run from an office above a dry cleaners in suburban London". There is no reference to the plaintiff in the second part of the published material. It deals with "degrees" described as "validated" issued in the field of the applicant's choice by answering a questionnaire on the applicant's "life experience". These are the "life experience" degrees. Secondly, it appears to be dealing with what are described as "email scams" awarded in the name of several "universities" one of which has a mailing address above the dry cleaning establishment pictured in the collage. This part of the article is in fact over two pages of the newspaper. It is a part of the article which appears to pull no punches in exposing those two types of "phony degrees", the "life experience" degree and the "email scam" degree. This part of the article (the second part) includes a paragraph which states: "While the purchase of fake degrees, or the actual degrees of phony universities, might appear victimless except for gullible or lazy employers, these operators usually imply jobs or promotion will follow. But people using fake qualifications are putting a time bomb in their CVs".