Mbuzi v Favell

[2012] QCA 17

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Appeal
2. › Practice and procedure
3. › Time for appeal
4. › Extension of time
5. › When refused
6. › Extraordinary delay of five and a half years
7. › Whether misconstruction of respondent's evidence supplied reasonable explanation for delay
8. › Whether proposed appeal had merit
9. › District Court of Queensland Act 1967 (Qld), s 118
10. › UCPR, r 748
1. Appeal
2. › Practice and procedure
3. › Costs
4. › Indemnity costs
5. › Whether indemnity costs appropriate where extraordinary delay, no merit, and application used as vehicle for irrelevant defamatory allegations
1. Defamation
2. › Absolute privilege
3. › Publication in the course of proceedings in courts
4. › Whether defamatory imputations published 'in the course of' litigation with neighbours
5. › Defamation Act 1889 (Qld)

Quick Take

An applicant's misconstruction of a respondent's trial evidence about the purpose of defamation proceedings does not supply a reasonable explanation for extraordinary delay in seeking leave to appeal. The recovery of substantial damages is one recognised means by which a defamed plaintiff may vindicate reputation, and a respondent's evidence about wanting to clear his name does not amount to a representation that a damages judgment will not be enforced. Indemnity costs may be awarded where an application is brought after extraordinary delay, lacks merit, and is used as a vehicle for irrelevant defamatory allegations.