Damages    February 1, 1977

Renouf v Federal Capital Press of Australia

The plaintiff’s removal from the office of Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs was imminent; he lobbied for his appointment by means of public statements calculated to be acceptable to the political party which held power; he had an excessive degree of self-consciousness; he was politically inept and involved himself in party politics; and he failed to understand or cope with the relationship between foreign policy and domestic politics. … more


Damages    February 1, 1977

Fairbairn v Fairfax

The plaintiff, wife of Australia’s Ambassador to the Netherlands, was a woman of such poor taste and so lacking in a sense of diplomacy that she was prepared to lobby her husband’s former colleagues to change his posting to suit her preference, and having been unsuccessful, with bad grace she accepted second best. … more


Damages    February 1, 1976

Hewitt v Western Australian Newspapers

The plaintiff, a permanent head of a government department, had been unilaterally terminated by vote of Cabinet for poor performance. (The article was headed “MP’s View, Hewitt sacked to cut criticism”.) … more


Damages    February 1, 1976

McRae v South Australian Telecasters

The plaintiff failed to observe the professional and ethical standards required of a legal practitioner; failed to act honourably in accordance with the accepted code of personal moral behaviour; failed to keep the standards of upright conduct which ought to be observed by a politician belonging to the ALP; betrayed the confidence of a trade union which was his client by giving away information which had been entrusted to him professionally and, all the more so, by supplying that information to a member of an opposing political party; and in so doing he was actuated by feelings of revenge or retaliation against certain other unions. … more


Damages    February 1, 1964

Porter v The Mercury Newspaper

A review of the plaintiff’s book The Watcher on the Cast Iron Balcony imputed that the plaintiff was guilty of literary dishonesty by inserting “Anglo Saxon words” in the work in order to promote publicity by attracting the attention of the censor, that the plaintiff had boasted that the book would be banned to promote publicity, and that the plaintiff was a worthless character as a man. … more