Menulog Pty Ltd v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd [2012] NSWSC 440

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Menulog Pty Ltd v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd [2012] NSWSC 440 Hearing dates: 26-27 March 2012 Decision date: 04 May 2012 Before: Hislop J Decision: 1. Notice of motion filed by the defendant on 26 March 2012 dismissed. 2. The defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the notice of motion. 3. The proceedings be listed for directions before the registrar on 9 May 2012. Catchwords: Torts - injurious falsehood - interlocutory injunction to restrain publication - application to dissolve injunction - no material change of circumstances Cases Cited: Brimaud v Honeyset Instant Print Pty Limited (1988) 217 ALR 440 at [46] Sundararajah v Teachers Federation Health Limited (No 3) [2010] NSWSC 471 at [7] Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Menulog Pty Limited (Plaintiff) TCN Channel Nine Pty Limited (Defendant) Representation: D.R. Sibtain/L. Brown (Plaintiff) J. Hmelnitsky (Defendant) Diamond Conway (Plaintiff) Johnson Winter & Slattery (Defendant) File Number(s): 2012/85898

Judgment

Introduction 1The plaintiff, by summons filed in this court on 16 March 2012, sought an injunction against the defendant inter alia prohibiting the broadcasting or communication to the public of a television broadcast promoted by the defendant under the name "Home delivery food con". 2The summons came on for hearing before Davies J as duty judge on 16 March 2012. The defendant, at short notice, appeared and opposed the making of the orders sought. 3Davies J granted the injunctive relief sought. He noted that the defendant may wish to argue further on an interlocutory basis that the injunction be dissolved. Accordingly he stood the matter over to the duty judge's list on 21 March 2012 to enable further consideration of that matter. 4On 21 March the matter came before me as duty judge. The defendant informed the Court that it wished to argue further on an interlocutory basis that the injunction be dissolved. The matter was stood over to 26 March for that purpose. 5On 26 March 2012 the defendant, pursuant to its notice of motion filed on that date sought that "Orders 2, 3, 4(a)-(i) of the Judgment/Order made in the proceedings on 16 March 2012 be set aside."