Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in previously struck out defamation proceedings, refuses the defendant's four motions on procedural grounds as follows: (a) the defendant cannot join TV3 as a co-defendant where the claim against TV3 was struck out in June 2014; (b) the defendant cannot join TV3 as a third party given the delay in seeking it; and (c) the defendant's claim for costs must be refused where TV3 is neither a defendant or even a third party to either of these claims.
Defamation proceedings - date to 2011 which was presidential cycle year - alleged defamation occurred during prime time - motions sought by defendant to have TV3 held responsible for her costs in defending the actions - court notes proceedings are already at an end - claims against TV3 were struck out by order of Keane J made on the 30th of June 2014 - claims against defendant were struck out on her own application on the 26th of July 2021 - court focuses on deciding whether the current applications are procedurally sound - court considers background to proceedings - considers the progress of the actions and the submissions - defendant makes 2 submissions - 1st that TV3 not released as Defendant when struck out in 2014 and application under slip rule is required - 2nd argument is that proceedings are not closed until a final order issues - court rejects both arguments - court concludes defendant cannot join TV3 as a codefendant where the claim against TV3 was struck out in June 2014 - further that defendant cannot join TV3 as a third party given the delay in seeking it - cites Susquehanna for this purpose - finally the defendant's claim for costs must be refused where TV3 is neither a defendant or even a third party to either of these claims.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.