Australia, March 12 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on Feb. 13:

1. This defamation action is fixed for hearing as a 10-day jury trial commencing on Monday 3 March 2025 before Wass SC DCJ.

2. The claim arises from two slanders made in two council meetings by the defendant, a councillor at the Wingecarribee Shire Council, in 2017. Proceedings were commenced in 2017. Mr Turland's defence, filed on 19 June 2019, has remained unchanged since that time (claims brought against four other defendants have been resolved). The third further amended statement of claim (which, inter alia, removed these parties) was filed on 19 September 2019 and has similarly remained unchanged since that time.

3. It is important for this trial to get a start on 3 March 2025 as, due to the pandemic and the plaintiff's health problems, three earlier trial dates have had to be vacated (6 August 2020, 23 February 2023 and 19 August 2024). It was because of this history of adjournments that Judge Wass SC was allocated as trial judge in July 2024, after the most recent application to vacate was foreshadowed.

4. The proceedings were carefully monitored during the next six months to ensure readiness. Then, in the last remaining days before the end of the law term, the plaintiff brought the Notice of Motion the subject of this judgment before her Honour. The Notice of Motion filed by the plaintiff's solicitors on 18 December 2024 seeks orders as follows:

1) Pursuant to rule 14.28 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) ("UCPR"), each of paragraphs [35(a)(1)], [35(a)(2)], [35(a)(3)] and [35(a)(5)] of the amended defence filed on 19 June 2019 ("Defence") be struck out on the basis that those paragraphs do not comply with:

a) S 26(1)(a) of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) ("the Act") as not being additional to the plaintiff's imputations and different in substance and/or alternatively,

b) S 26(1)(b) of the Act, in that if proved true or substantially true, they do not prevent the plaintiff's imputations from causing further damage to the plaintiff's reputation.

2) Pursuant to s 98 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) and/or r 42.20 of the UCPR, the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of this application, and the proceedings in relation to those paragraphs which are struck out.

5. The plaintiff relies upon the affidavit of Anthony Byrne sworn on 18 December 2024, which explains the reason for the application being brought now as being that he took over management of these proceedings in July 2024 from another solicitor in the plaintiff's solicitors' office, and now considered that this application should be brought.

What are the applications before the court?

6. Judge Wass SC cannot hear this application, as she remains away on leave until 3 March 2025.

7. The first application to determine is the defendant's objection to the hearing of this application outside the trial, by reason of the subject matter being a trial issue, as well as because of its lateness.

8. The second application is the relief sought by the plaintiff in the Notice of Motion.

9. The third application is an application by the plaintiff to set aside a subpoena. That is the subject of a separate judgment.

*Rest of the document and Footnotes can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/19517a1673fc5c2c374e3cbe)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.