Al-Shennag v Statewide Roads Ltd [2008] NSWCA 300

New South Wales Court of Appeal

CITATION: Al-Shennag v Statewide Roads Ltd [2008] NSWCA 300

HEARING DATE(S): 28 October 2008

JUDGMENT DATE: 12 November 2008

JUDGMENT OF: Beazley JA at 1; Tobias JA at 2; Bell JA at 110

1. Extend the time for the filing by the appellant of his summons for leave to appeal up to and including 13 March 2008. 2. Grant the appellant leave to appeal. 3. Dismiss the appeal. 4. The appellant to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal. DECISION: 5. Grant the cross-appellants leave to appeal. 6. Dismiss the cross-appeal. 7. The second respondent to pay the disbursements, if any, incurred by the appellant in respect of the summons for leave to cross-appeal and the cross-appeal. 8. Set aside the orders made by Walmsley A-J on 12 December 2007 and in lieu thereof order: (a) that the proceedings against the first respondent be dismissed with costs; (b) that there be judgment for the appellant against the second respondent to the effect that the imputations pleaded in paragraph 13(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) of the amended Statement of Claim filed on 29 May 2007 were conveyed by the matter complained of and were defamatory of the appellant.

CATCHWORDS: DEFAMATION – Whether imputations of and concerning appellant – Whether imputations conveyed by matter complained of – Report of consultant engineer in relation to work of appellant as professional engineer – Whether imputations were defamatory of appellant – Imputations disparaging of appellant in professional context – Publication – Whether imputations were published by first respondent – First respondent parent company of employer of report's author – Whether employer of report's author was agent of first respondent – Whether first respondent and employer of report's author were in partnership – Whether first respondent vicariously liable for publication by employer of report's author - CORPORATIONS – Group of companies – Whether parent company and wholly owned subsidiary in partnership – Whether parent vicariously liable for publication of report by subsidiary – Whether subsidiary was agent for parent in publishing report – Whether 'corporate veil' should be pierced/lifted as between parent and subsidiary - PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS – Self-represented litigant – Whether primary judge afforded appellant fair and just opportunity to prepare and present case – Appellant claimed to be unaware certain issues were to be determined – Alleged failure of primary judge to explain court processes to appellant – Alleged failure of primary judge to properly assess totality of submissions put by appellant