Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Queensland University of Technology Law and Justice Journal |
BOOK
REVIEW
AMANDA
STICKLEY[*]
Patrick George,
Defamation Law in Australia, (LexisNexis Butterworths 2006)
494pp
Defamation Law in Australia is a thorough examination of the law
of defamation throughout history. However, this text is no dry and boring
discourse –
the author’s obviously extensive knowledge of the law of
defamation[1] has enabled this text to
be not only informative but also very interesting and even – in places
– entertaining.
In the past the law of defamation in Australia
has been a complex and confusing action, with each jurisdiction having its own
set
of laws. For example, Queensland and Tasmania codified the civil law of
defamation, whilst New South Wales relied upon the common
law as modified by
legislation. After many failed attempts at imposing a national law of
defamation, the enactment of the Defamation Act 2005 in nearly all of the
Australian jurisdictions has brought about some uniformity. This text provides
a detailed description and analysis
of the law prior to the 2005 legislation as
well as guidance on the new legislation, noting the differences between the
jurisdictions.
Defamation Law in Australia is divided into five
parts, commencing with an interesting and entertaining consideration of the
development of defamation law in
England. For example, who knew that the demise
of duelling in the mid 19th century can be linked to the developing
law of slander
and the change in fashions (pistols and swords no longer being
worn as part of dress)? Part 1 also catalogues the development of defamation
law in England and in Australia through to the present day. Detailed references
to
recent cases and current media practices, such as the role of the paparazzi
and new communication technologies, place the law of
defamation in context in
modern society.
Part 2 of the text entitled ‘General
Principles’ is really the elements of the action – the meanings of
defamatory matter
and publication and the capacity to sue and be sued in
defamation. The chapters that examine what is defamatory provide an excellent
reference to leading cases, both old and current. Unlike other texts that are
devoted to all of torts law and are therefore confined
to a brief examination of
what is capable of being defamatory, Defamation Law in Australia provides
a detailed analysis of particular defamatory meanings, with example cases that
assist in demonstrating the point.
Part 2 also includes a consideration
of what are often thought of as related causes of action. The supposed
developing common law tort
of privacy is examined in its own chapter and another
chapter is devoted to other avenues open to a plaintiff for the publication
of
material, such as injurious falsehood and misleading or deceptive conduct under
the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) or its equivalent under the State Fair
Trading Acts.
Alternative solutions to litigation are dealt with in Part
3 in one chapter, considering apologies, offers, mediation and arbitration.
Part 4, which comprises the bulk of the text, then examines litigation,
that is, the defences and remedies for defamation. Each defence
to defamation
has been given its own chapter. The traditional defences are comprehensively
considered - the common law defence,
the statutory defence, any previous
statutorily modified and/or codified version of the defences are all included.
Reference to
the standard defamation authorities is supplemented with in-depth
analysis of recent Australian and international decisions.
Defences that
have been introduced by the defamation legislation of 2005 are investigated with
the same attention to detail. Comparisons
with similar provisions from the now
repealed New South Wales Defamation Act 1974 assist the reader in the
interpretation of the new defences such as contextual truth and honest
opinion.
The chapters on remedies cover the whole spectrum of the
possible damages available to a defamed plaintiff. The text makes no claim
of
providing clear principles and guidelines as to how to assess damages for a
plaintiff’s injured reputation with accuracy.
Instead it examines the
approaches of the courts over the years to measuring a person’s reputation
and awarding compensation
that is appropriate and rational. As an introduction
the author points out the lack of consistency in awards of damages. Referring
to the English case of Sutcliffe v Pressedram Ltd [1991] 1 QB 152 where a
jury awarded the wife of the Yorkshire Ripper £600,000 when a magazine
suggested that she had sold her story to newspapers,
the author notes that the
editor of the magazine after the judgment stated: ‘If this is justice,
then I am a banana.’
(at 373). The author points out that in Australia
similar anomalies also arise, for example in Carson v John Fairfax & Sons
Ltd [1993] HCA 31; (1993) 178 CLR 44 the High Court ordered a new trial upon appeal that
the award of damages by the jury was excessive. The new jury awarded $1.3
million
– more than twice the amount awarded by the original jury.
The assessment of damages under the common law is explained in detail
and includes chapters on:
• General damages – damages for
consolation, reparation and vindication of reputation;
• Aggravated
damages – damages when the defendant’s conduct is improper or not
bona fide;
• Exemplary damages – damages to punish the defendant;
• Special damages – damages for the economic loss caused by the
publication; and
• Mitigation – a consideration of the
plaintiff’s conduct and bad reputation or recovery of damages previously,
the lack of malice on the part of the defendant, the truth of imputations,
apologies by the defendant and the circumstance of the
publication.
Alternative remedies are also dealt with in the text, the
author noting that with the introduction of a cap upon the award of damages
by
the 2005 legislation, plaintiffs may seek alternatives if damages will not
achieve their objective in bringing the action in defamation
(p410). Therefore
the possibility of the interlocutory injunction, the equitable remedy of account
of profits and crisis management
are explored.
Part Five –
‘Evidence/Transitional’ – works through the evidence required
in a defamation action and notes
the transitional provisions for the 2005
legislation. In respect of evidence there is a discussion of what evidence is
required
to prove a defamatory matter has been published, as well as whether
evidence of the plaintiff’s criminal convictions may be
raised. Criminal
defamation is also briefly considered in its own chapter to make the
consideration of the topic complete.
The text contains two informative
and useful appendices. Appendix I contains the Defamation Act 2005
(NSW), whilst Appendix II has comparative tables for not only the various
Defamation Acts 2005, but also the limitation of actions legislation and
criminal law Acts.
Defamation Law in Australia is an excellent
reference not only for practitioners, students and academics, but journalists
will also find it informative. By tracing
the history of defamation law it
allows the reader to understand and appreciate the dynamic nature of the law of
defamation. By
providing an analysis of the current national defamation law the
text is a valuable resource.
[*]
LLB, Grad Dip Leg Prac, LLM (QUT), Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law,
Queensland University of
Technology.
[1] The text has
already been cited in Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O’Neill
[2006] HCA 46 (28 September 2006) and Channel Seven Adelaide Pty Ltd v S, DJ
[2007] SASC 117 (4 April 2007).
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/QUTLawJJl/2007/8.html