In defamation proceedings where the plaintiff is not named, knowledge by readers of the plaintiff's current ownership or operation of a business does not, without more, support a reasonable conclusion that the plaintiff was the operator during an earlier period referred to in the publication, particularly where a significant temporal gap exists. Particulars of identification expressed in the present tense confine the plaintiff to evidence of current knowledge only. However, leave to amend particulars may be granted on appeal where the amendment would enable an arguable case to be propounded and the only prejudice is costs.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 19 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 19 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.