MediumNeutralCitation:

HearingDates:
DecisionDate:
Jurisdiction:
Before:
Decision:
Catchwords:
Category:
Parties:
Representation:
FileNumber(s):
PublicationRestriction:
1
2
3
4
5
6
DistrictCourt
NewSouthWales
MicklevFarley[2013]NSWDC295
29/11/2013
29/11/2013
Civil
ElkaimSCDCJ
Verdictfortheplaintifffor$105,000withcosts.
Assessmentofdamages,defamationviaTwitterandFacebook.
Principaljudgment
ChristineMickle(Plaintiff)
AndrewFarley(Defendant)
Kennedys(Australasia)PtyLtd(Plaintiff)
Noappearance(Defendant)
ATSDawson(Plaintiff)
Noappearance(Defendant)
2013/00174366
No
EXTEMPOREJUDGMENT
HISHONOUR:TheplaintiffcommencedthisactionindefamationbyaStatementofClaimfiledon6June2013.A
DefencewasfiledandlateranAmendedDefence.
TheAmendedDefencewasstruckoutbyherHonour,JudgeOlsson,on18Octoberthisyear.InadditionherHonour
enteredjudgmentfortheplaintiffandsetthematterdownfortheassessmentofdamagestoday.
InconsideringtheassessmentofdamagesIhaveheardfromtwowitnessesandalsoreadanumberofaffidavits.One
oftheaffidavitsiseffectivelyanexpert'sreport.Theotheraffidavitsgototheplaintiff'sreputationandthehurtthathas
beencausedbythedefamatorycomments.
Thedefendantisayoungman,nowapparentlyaged20,andwasatthetimeofthepublicationsoneyearoutofhigh
school.HehadcompletedtheHigherSchoolCertificatein2011atOrangeHighSchool.Inadditiontohimattending
thathighschoolhisfatherwasateacherthereandoccupiedthepositionofheadteacherfromabouttheyear2000in
themusicandartsdepartment.Thedefendant'sfatherwasdescribedasagentlemanwhohadanumberofhealth
issues.
Theplaintiffwasalsoateacherattheschoolandwasconcernedmostlywithmusic.Sheisnow58yearsofage.She
ismarriedandhasthreechildren.Bythetimetheeventsinthiscaseoccurredshehadgivenmanyyearsofdevotion
tostudentsandtoteachinggenerally.ShehadestablishedawidespreadreputationnotonlyinOrangebutthrougha
widecountryarearegardinghercapacityasateacher,herconcernforherstudentsandherdevotiontothepursuitof
excellenceinteaching.Thisexcellencewaswellknowntothethenprincipaloftheschool(MrsAngus)whogaveoral
evidencebeforemeandhadbeenawareoftheplaintiff'sreputationbeforeshejoinedtheschoolasprincipal.
InNovember2012MrsAnguswasretiring.Suchwastheesteeminwhichtheplaintiffwasheldthatstudents
approachedMrsAngusandaskedifpartofherretirementfunctioncouldbedevotedtotherenamingofthemusic
centreasthe"MrsMickleMusicCentre"inhonouroftheplaintiffandherhistoryanddevotiontoherstudentsand
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
classes.
Iwillreturnbrieflytothedefendantandinparticularhisfather.Hisfatherlefttheschoolin2008inordertoattendto
personalissues.Asaresultofhimleaving,theplaintiff,perhapstosomedegreereluctantly,tookoverhispositionon
anactingbasis.Forsomereasonitseemsthatthedefendantbearsagrudgeagainsttheplaintiffapparentlybasedon
abeliefthatshehadsomethingtodowithhisfatherleavingtheschool.Thereisabsolutelynoevidencetosubstantiate
thatbelief.
However,actingonthatbelief,on15November2012throughthesocialmediumsofTwitterandFacebook,anumber
ofdefamatorycommentswerepostedabouttheplaintiff.Thosecommentsarethesubjectoftheplaintiff'sactionand
aresetoutintheStatementofClaimandalsoinExhibitsG,HandK.
Theywerebroughttotheattentionoftheplaintiffsomedayslaterbytheprincipalwhofeltitappropriatetotellthe
plaintiffaboutthem,nodoubtoutofasenseofconcernforherandintheknowledgethatthespreadingofuntruthful
mattersonsocialmediacouldbeverydamaging.Inoteforexamplethattheprincipalsaidthatshedevotedtimeeach
weektodealingwithFacebookissuesthataroseinrelationtostudents.Itiswellknownthatstudentscanuse
Facebookforbullying.
Thedefendantwasnotastudentwhenthepublicationsweremadeandhecannotrelyonanysuggestionthathewas
actingasapupilwhomightbeviewedasoneofagroupofstudentsunhappywithateacher'sperformance.The
defendantinfacthadneverbeentaughtbytheplaintiffandhehadleftschoolayearbefore.
Theeffectofthepublicationontheplaintiffwasdevastating.Thiswasnotonlyherevidencebut,asIhavesaidbefore,
thereisalsoaffidavitmaterialtothateffectandthereistheevidenceofMrsAngus.Myimpressionoftheplaintiffinthe
witnessboxwasoneofaveryhonestwomanwhohadbeenterriblyhurtbothbythecommentsingeneralbutperhaps
moreparticularlybythesuggestionthatshemayhavebeenresponsibleforanyharm,illhealthoreffectofanyofher
actionsonthedefendant'sfather.AsIhavesaid,theseallegationshavenosubstancewhatsoever.
On24November2012therewerefurtherTwitterpublications.Thesearedescribedinparagraph5oftheStatementof
Claim.Theplaintiffhassaid,andIaccept,thatalloftheimputationsthataresetoutintheStatementofClaimare
untrue.Thedevastationfeltbytheplaintiffisevidencedbythefactthatsheimmediatelyleftonsickleaveandisonly
nowreturningonalimitedbasistowork.Butforthepublications,herevidencewasthatshewouldhavecontinuedin
themannerthatshewasteachingin2012untilshereachedtheageof65whichisinaboutsevenyearstime.
Theplaintiffisobviouslyentitledtoanawardofcompensatorydamagesflowingfromtheestablisheddefamatory
publications.Ihavehadthebenefitofconcisesubmissionsondamagesfromlearnedcounselfortheplaintiffwhohas
setoutanumberoftheprinciplesthatIwillapply.Ashehassubmittedtome,thegeneraldamagetoreputationis
presumedtobethenaturalandprobableconsequenceofadefamatorypublication.Thecompensationisintendedto
vindicatetheperson'sreputationintheeyesofthegeneralcommunityandcompensatethepersonforthedistress
andinsultfelt.Theremustbeaconsolationforthepersonaldistressandhurtcausedtotheplaintiffbythepublication
aswellasanattemptthroughanawardofmonetarycompensationtoachieveasfaraspossibleareparationand
vindicationoftheplaintiff'sreputation.
Anawardofdamagesmustnotbeexcessivebutmustsignaltothepublicthatthevindicationoftheplaintiff's
reputationhasbeenattemptedsothatthepublicwillknowthattheliespublishedbythedefendanthavenotruth
whatsoever.
Ihavebeenreferredtoanumberofcasesandremindedthatthemaximumthatmaybeawardedunderthelegislation
is$355,500.MrDawson'swrittensubmissionsdidnotstateaspecificfigure,perhapsbecauseofhisdeferencetothe
sometimesheldviewofcourtsthatitisnotappropriateforcounseltosuggestspecificfigures.Idonottakethatview
andsoinvitedMrDawsontomakeasubmissionofaspecificfigure.Hisresponsewas$100,000inrespectof
compensatorydamages.
HavingregardtotheprinciplesthatIhavesetoutaboveIthinkthatfigureisalittlehighbutIdonotthinkitisveryfar
fromtheappropriatefigure.Inmyviewtheawardofcompensatorydamagesshouldbe$85,000.
Thereisalsoaclaimforaggravateddamages.TheentitlementtoaggravateddamagesarisesinthiscaseIthink
becauseoftheconductofthedefendantintheresponsetotheclaim.ExhibitsJandMcontaintherelevant
correspondence.Theplaintiff'ssolicitorswrotetothedefendantattheendofNovember2012.Hedidnotreply.They
wroteagainon12December.Herepliedaboutaweeklateron20December.HisletterisExhibitJ.Inthisletterhe
says:
18
19
20
21
22
(1)
(2)
(3)
"Allcommentsreferredtobyyouhavebeenremovedfrommysocialmediapages."
Hecarriesonalittlelater:
"IapologiseunreservedlytoMrsMickleforanyhurtorupsetcausedtoherbystatementsmadeonmysocial
mediapage."
Atfirstsightthereistheappearanceofanunequivocalapologyandwithdrawalofthepublications.Unfortunatelythe
apparentsincerityofthatletterwascontradictedbyeventsthatlateroccurred.Themostobviousoftheseeventsis
thatintheDefenceinitiallyfiledtotheproceedingsadefenceoftruthwasputforward.Thedefenceoftruthwhenitis
spuriousisparticularlyhurtfultoapersonwhohasbeenthesubjectofsuchunsubstantiatedallegations.Thatdefence
soonfellawayandanAmendedDefenceassertingqualifiedprivilegewasfiled.Thatdefencealsohadnosubstance
andwasultimatelystruckout.Thedefendantthenseemstohaveabandonedhisinterestintheproceedingsandhas
notappeared.InotethatIamsatisfiedthatheisawareoftheordersmadebyJudgeOlssonandoftoday'shearingI
refertoExhibitA.
HavingregardthentothemattersthatIhavejustoutlined,andwhichinmyviewjustifyanawardofaggravated
damages,Iamoftheopinionthatthatawardshouldbeinthesumof$20,000.
ThereisonematterthatIomittedinrelationtothecompensatorydamagesandthatistostressthatwhendefamatory
publicationsaremadeonsocialmediaitiscommonknowledgethattheyspread.Theyarespreadeasilybythesimple
manipulationofmobilephonesandcomputers.Theirevilliesinthegrapevineeffectthatstemsfromtheuseofthis
typeofcommunication.IhavetakenthatintoaccountintheassessmentofdamagesthatIpreviouslymade.
TheordersImakethereforeare:
Therewillbejudgmentfortheplaintiffinthesumof$105,000.
Thedefendantistopaytheplaintiff'scostsoftheproceedings.
Theexhibitsmaybereturned.
**********
DISCLAIMEREveryefforthasbeenmadetocomplywithsuppressionordersorstatutoryprovisionsprohibitingpublicationthatmayapplytothis
judgmentordecision.Theonusremainsonanypersonusingmaterialinthejudgmentordecisiontoensurethattheintendeduseofthatmaterial
doesnotbreachanysuchorderorprovision.FurtherenquiriesmaybedirectedtotheRegistryoftheCourtorTribunalinwhichitwasgenerated.