NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Hatfield v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd (No 2) [2011] NSWSC 737 Hearing dates: 7 September 2010 Decision date: 21 July 2011 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Simpson J Decision: Notice of Motion dismissed with costs. Catchwords: DEFAMATION - claim by plaintiff for special damages - costs incurred prior to publication - duty to mitigate damage - application by defendants under Rule 14.28 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 to strike out claim - collateral proceedings challenging separate costs orders - reasonableness of anticipatory actions - defendants' Notice of Motion dismissed with costs Legislation Cited: Supreme Court Rules 1970 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 Cases Cited: Anderson v Bowles [1951] HCA 61; 84 CLR 310 Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Comalco Ltd (1986) 12 FCR 510 Australian Federation of Islamic Council Inc v Westpac Banking Corporation (1988) 17 NSWLR 623 Avenhouse v Hornsby Shire Council (1998) 44 NSWLR 1 British Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Company, Limited v Underground Electric Railways Company of London Limited [1912] AC 673 Coshott v Woollahra Municipal Council [2008] NSWCA 176 Galaxy Communications Pty Ltd v Paramount Films of Australia Inc (Unreported, NSWCoA, 27 March 1998) General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) [1964] HCA 69; 112 CLR 125 Hanrahan v Ainsworth (1985) 1 NSWLR 370 Hatfield v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd [2010] NSWCA 69 Hatfield v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 161 Lloyds & Scottish Finance Ltd v Modern Cars & Caravan (Kingston) Ltd [1966] 1 QB 764 Queanbeyan Leagues Club Ltd v Poldune Pty Ltd & Ors [2000] NSWSC 1100 Russell v The Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church For The Archdiocese of Sydney [2008] NSWCA 217 Transocean Capital Pty Ltd v AFSIG Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 806; 202 FLR 270 Texts Cited: McGregor on Damages, Sweet & Maxwell, 14th ed (1980) McGregor on Damages, Sweet & Maxwell / Thomson Reuters, 18th ed (2009) Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Wendy Gaye Hatfield (Plaintiff) TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd (First Defendant) Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd (Second Defendant) Screentime Pty Ltd (Third Defendant) Representation: Counsel: K P Smark SC/S T Chrysanthou (Plaintiff) B R McClintock SC/M R Richardson (Defendants) Solicitors: Kalantzis Lawyers (Plaintiff) Johnson Winter & Slattery (Defendants) File Number(s): 2010/142076
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate