CONTRACT — Hire of art gallery — Whether implied duty of good faith or cooperation — Whether placing conditions on hirers’ access to gallery constituted breach — Whether collateral contract for sale of catalogue by gallery — Whether display of disclaimer in gallery constituted breach — Late payment of bond and sale proceeds constituted breach — Whether a director whose actions constitute a breach of contract can be liable for the tort of inducing breach of contract — Damages for late payment.
DEFAMATION — Internet — Personal websites — Three articles concerning hire of art gallery — Defamatory imputations — Application of the ‘Polly Peck’ principle — Whether hyperlinked article relevant to assessment of imputations carried by matter complained of.
DEFAMATION — Publication on internet — Judicial notice of use of search engines such as Google and Bing to increase instances of publication.
DEFAMATION — Common law defence of justification — Elements of defence.
DEFAMATION — Common law defence of fair comment — Elements of defence — Whether management of a gallery open to the public is a matter of public interest — Whether opinion must be one that an honest person might reasonably form — Whether defendant must provide particulars of facts on which comment is based — Test of malice.
DEFAMATION — Common law defence of qualified privilege — Elements of defence — Test of common duty or interest — Whether defence available where defamatory material published on generalist website as distinct from specialist website — Whether defence available for defamatory statements concerning management of art gallery open to public — Whether defence available for statements on internet in reply to verbal attack in the presence of attendees at art gallery — Test of malice.
DEFAMATION — Statutory defences of justification and honest opinion — Defamation Act 2005 ss 25, 31.
DEFAMATION — Damages — Common law principles — Application of ‘eggshell skull’ principle — Grapevine effect — Mitigation of damages for prior bad reputation of plaintiff — Mitigation due to provocation — Recovery by companies.
DEFAMATION — Damages — Statutory cap — Effect of statutory cap where there are multiple plaintiffs — Whether statutory cap requires scaling of damages — Mitigation where multiple publication of similar matter — Defamation Act 2005 ss 35, 38.
DEFAMATION — Damages — Aggravated damages — Whether timing of aggravating conduct affects application of statutory damages cap — Conduct of defendant that is improper, unjustified and lacking in bona fides — Further damaging publications by defendant — Unjustified maintenance of defences — Failure to remove defamatory material from internet — Relevance of defendant’s motives — Whether amount awarded for aggravated damages should be separately identified — Defamation Act 2005 ss 35, 36.