| Shift2Neutral Pty Ltd v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (NSWCA) - defamation - no error in upholding defence of justification - appeal dismissed |
| Atkinson v Habermann (QSC) - evidence - contract - appointment of single expert granted |
| Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read) |
Shift2Neutral Pty Ltd v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 274
Court of Appeal of New South Wales
McColl & Basten JJA; Simpson J
Defamation - second appellant incorporated first appellant (Shift2Neutral) - first appellant claimed to conduct “environmental audits” and “issue certificates representing credits under a carbon offset scheme” - newspaper published by first respondent published two articles prepared by second respondent - appellants sued respondents for defamation - trial judge found imputations conveyed and were defamatory - however trial judge upheld respondents’ defence of justification pursuant to s25 Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) and gave judgment for respondents - appellants contended that trial judge should have found it had not been established certificates not valuable or genuine or available to offset emissions - whether trial judge reversed onus of proof with respect to defence - held: appellants failed to demonstrate error by trial judge in upholding defence of justification - appeal dismissed.
Shift2Neutral
|
Atkinson v Habermann [2015] QSC 262
Supreme Court of Queensland
McMeekin J
Evidence - contract - plaintiff claimed specific performance of contract or damages for breach - contract concerned the taking of millable timber by plaintiff from defendant’s land - plaintiff sought appointment of single expert pursuant to r429I Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) and order that expert prepare report “on the issue of millable timber” - interests of justice - held: it was case particularly suited to appointment of single expert - assessment of damages required determination of quantity and value of millable timber - issue of assessment of damages not straight forward - appointment of single expert would probably limit costs - receipt of expert’s report would probably expedite trial if trial necessary - each factor in r429K(1) favoured appointment - single expert appointed.
Atkinson
|
