Where a plaintiff deliberately destroys evidence before commencing defamation proceedings, at a time when those proceedings are in contemplation, the destruction may amount to an attempt to pervert the course of justice warranting striking out the proceedings as an abuse of process, even though no defence has been filed and no discovery obligations exist in the contemplated proceedings. The offence of attempting to pervert the course of justice is not limited to defendants or respondents. However, the dissent highlights that establishing the requisite intent directed at specific contemplated proceedings (as opposed to existing proceedings in which discovery obligations have been breached) requires careful analysis of the specificity of the plaintiff's contemplation.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.