Showing restraint: interlocutory injunctions in defamation cases
Access status:
Open Access
Type
ArticleAuthor/s
Rolph, DavidAbstract
Until recently, there was some disagreement among courts at first instance and intermediate appellate courts across Australia as to the proper approach to the grant of an interlocutory injunction to restrain the apprehended publication of defamatory matter. The decision of the High ...
See moreUntil recently, there was some disagreement among courts at first instance and intermediate appellate courts across Australia as to the proper approach to the grant of an interlocutory injunction to restrain the apprehended publication of defamatory matter. The decision of the High Court of Australia in Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill has provided some degree of certainty in relation to this issue. This article analyses the decision and evaluates its impact on the principles and practice in this area of law. The case also raises important questions about the concepts of 'trial by media' and 'reputation' for the purposes of defamation law, which warrant examination. However, whatever clarity may have been introduced by the judgment of the High Court may need to be re-assessed in the near future as a result of developments in both Australia and, in particular, the United Kingdom in relation to the direct protection of privacy.
See less
See moreUntil recently, there was some disagreement among courts at first instance and intermediate appellate courts across Australia as to the proper approach to the grant of an interlocutory injunction to restrain the apprehended publication of defamatory matter. The decision of the High Court of Australia in Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill has provided some degree of certainty in relation to this issue. This article analyses the decision and evaluates its impact on the principles and practice in this area of law. The case also raises important questions about the concepts of 'trial by media' and 'reputation' for the purposes of defamation law, which warrant examination. However, whatever clarity may have been introduced by the judgment of the High Court may need to be re-assessed in the near future as a result of developments in both Australia and, in particular, the United Kingdom in relation to the direct protection of privacy.
See less
Date
2009Source title
Media and Arts Law ReviewVolume
14Issue
3Publisher
LexisNexisLicence
Copyright All Rights ReservedRights statement
This article was published by LexisNexis and should be cited as: Rolph, D. (2009). Showing restraint: interlocutory injunctions in defamation cases. Media and Arts Law Review, 14(3), 255–291.Faculty/School
The University of Sydney Law SchoolShare