NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Pahuja v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd (No 3) [2018] NSWSC 893 Hearing dates: 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13 June 2017 Decision date: 15 June 2018 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: McCallum J Decision: Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $300,000. Catchwords: DEFAMATION – damages – consideration of matters of aggravation – unfair editing of matter complained of – absence of evidence to support allegations made in broadcast – unreasonable maintenance of truth defence – consideration of matters of mitigation – partial success of truth defence – dishonest evidence Legislation Cited: Defamation Act 2005 (NSW), s 22(3), 34, 35 Cases Cited: Bauer Media Pty Ltd v Wilson (No 2) [2018] VSCA 154 Harbour Radio Pty Ltd v Ahmed [2015] NSWCA 290 Holt v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd (2014) 86 NSWLR 96; [2014] NSWCA 90 McDonnell & East Limited v McGregor (1936) 56 CLR 50; [1936] HCA 28 Pamplin v Express Newspapers Ltd [1988] 1 WLR 116 Triggell v Pheeney (1951) 82 CLR 497; [1951] HCA 23 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Sunil Pahuja (plaintiff) TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd (first defendant) Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd (second defendant) Ninemsn Pty Ltd (third defendant) Jesse Grayson (fourth defendant) Representation: Counsel: K Smark SC, S Chrysanthou B McClintock SC, M Richardson
Solicitors: Newhouse Lawyers (plaintiff) Mark O'Brien Legal (defendants) File Number(s): 2015/205648 Publication restriction: None
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