Wraydeh v Nationwide News Pty Limited Wraydeh v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited

Case [2021] HCASL 235


WRAYDEH

v

NATIONWIDE NEWS PTY LIMITED

WRAYDEH

v

FAIRFAX MEDIA PUBLICATIONS PTY LIMITED
[2021] HCASL 235
S117/2021
S118/2021

  1. These applications for special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Simpson AJA, with whom Bell P and Gleeson JA agreed) are not suitable vehicles to address the sole ground of appeal concerning the scope of the defence of qualified privilege. The applications should be dismissed.

  2. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the applications with costs.

M.M. Gordon J.J. Edelman
2 December 2021
Details
AGLC
Wraydeh v Nationwide News Pty Limited Wraydeh v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited [2021] HCASL 235
Case
[2021] HCASL 235
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, Mr. Adnan Wraydeh, sought special leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which had dismissed his appeal against a decision of the primary judge. The respondents to the applications were Nationwide News Pty Limited and Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited, publishers of newspapers and other media outlets. The dispute centred around the scope of the defence of qualified privilege in defamation proceedings.

The central legal issue in these applications was whether the Court of Appeal had erred in its interpretation of the scope of the defence of qualified privilege. Mr. Wraydeh argued that the Court of Appeal had misapplied the law in determining that the respondents' publications were protected by qualified privilege. The applicants contended that the publications were not made in the public interest and that the respondents had failed to establish the necessary elements of the defence.

The High Court found that the applications for special leave to appeal were not suitable vehicles to address the specific legal issue of the scope of the defence of qualified privilege. The Court observed that the applicants had not demonstrated that the Court of Appeal's decision involved a significant question of law of general importance or that it was necessary for the High Court to exercise its discretion to hear the appeal. The Court also noted that the applicants had not provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in seeking special leave, which further undermined the suitability of the applications.

The High Court dismissed the applications for special leave to appeal and directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the applications with costs. This outcome meant that the Court of Appeal's decision regarding the scope of the defence of qualified privilege stood as the final determination of the matter.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.