MyAssignmentServices uses cookies to deliver the best experience possible. Read more

  • Internal Code :
  • Subject Code :
  • University :
  • Subject Name : Law

Defamation Act

Tony will be successful in suing the daily paper by invoking the provision of Section 35 stated in Division 1 of the Defamation Act, 2005.

Relevant case laws:

As per[1] the wrongdoer will only be responsible up to the limit set by the statutory provisions. Section 35 states about the remedies available to the plaintiff in case of a non-economic loss with a limit of $250000 and more in case of aggravated damages caused.

The article against our client has published words which our client has also complained of, hence, the defamation can be proved[2].

The case[3] has certain similarities with our case as the Australian Broadcasting Corporation hereinafter referred to as Defendant, aired a report broadcasted by a New Zealand channel displaying that the NZ labor party had the influence of big corporates because of some corporate interests making significant contributions to the 1987 election campaign funds of New Zealand Labour Party. David Lange hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff, was the former PM of New Zealand who was elected from the Labour Party. Hence, such allegations in the report made the Plaintiff file a defamation case against the Defendant stating that the Defendant had made defamatory statements to the effect that he had been corrupt while in office. The High Court held that the defendant’s aired program was defamatory.

The Lange case is similar to our case as our client is also from a political background and is in the same way defamed by a media by publishing a false article in the newspaper. In light of the above, it can be concluded that our client will be successful in suing the daily newspaper for damages. 

Bibliography for Defamation Act

Legislation:

Defamation Act, 2005

Case Laws:

Davis v Nationwide News Pty Limited [2008] NSWSC 693

Knuppfer v London Express Newspapers [1944] AC 116

Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520

[1] Davis v Nationwide News Pty Limited [2008] NSWSC 693

[2] Knuppfer v London Express Newspapers [1944] AC 116

[3] Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520

Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Law Assignment Help

Get It Done! Today

Applicable Time Zone is AEST [Sydney, NSW] (GMT+11)
Not Specific >5000
  • 1,212,718Orders

  • 4.9/5Rating

  • 5,063Experts

Highlights

  • 21 Step Quality Check
  • 2000+ Ph.D Experts
  • Live Expert Sessions
  • Dedicated App
  • Earn while you Learn with us
  • Confidentiality Agreement
  • Money Back Guarantee
  • Customer Feedback

Just Pay for your Assignment

  • Turnitin Report

    $10.00
  • Proofreading and Editing

    $9.00Per Page
  • Consultation with Expert

    $35.00Per Hour
  • Live Session 1-on-1

    $40.00Per 30 min.
  • Quality Check

    $25.00
  • Total

    Free
  • Let's Start

Get
500 Words Free
on your assignment today

Browse across 1 Million Assignment Samples for Free

Explore MASS
Order Now

Request Callback

My Assignment Services- Whatsapp Tap to ChatGet instant assignment help

Get 500 Words FREE
Ask your Question
Need Assistance on your
existing assignment order?