Readers will recall that in December 2008 we reported on A$350,000 in damages awarded to former cyclist Mark French in his case against radio station Triple M for defamatory comments to the effect that he was a drug cheat and an "un-Australian" dobber ( see previous article).
In his latest victory, Mr French was last week awarded A$175,000 against The Herald and Weekly Times for material that appeared in The Herald Sun in August 2004.
The lesser award may be attributable to the fact that Mr French proved defamatory meanings were conveyed in only one of the two articles complained of, and also because Mr French abandoned a claim for exemplary damages early in the proceedings.
Justice Beach found some "force" in the suggestion that it was difficult to determine exactly how much impact the particular publication of 10 August 2004 had on the reputation of Mr French, but accepted that its printing had "caused the plaintiff not insignificant upset". He determined that vindication was the main consideration relevant to an award of damages in this situation. With this in mind, his Honour found that the publication's circulation figures were less relevant here than in other scenarios.
Mr French's latest action was decided under the law in place prior to the Defamation Act 2005 (Act). As of 30 June 2009, the maximum damages for non-economic loss available under the Act stands at A$294,500. It has previously been observed that the damages "cap" may not be meeting public expectations and provides inadequate judicial discretion for penalties; however Mr French's latest award would have fallen comfortably within the current cap.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
