Gary Hevey Gordon & Jackson 9225 8075 9225 7333 ...
Gary Hevey Gordon & Jackson 9225 8075 9225 7333 ...
Gary Hevey Gordon & Jackson 9225 8075 9225 7333 ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
15<br />
can only presume that as the defendant took no part in the proceedings any<br />
question of limitations periods was not raised. Judge Davis 46 was guided by the<br />
terms of the Act and considered the matter relating to Ms Popovic, (referred to<br />
earlier in this paper 47 ), as well as the case of Winn v Goodwin 48 (where Judge<br />
Shelton had awarded $30,000 in relation to defamatory statements repeated in<br />
correspondence to VCAT) and finally a decision of Judge Campbell in the<br />
matter of Gluyas v Tenana 49 (where $20,000 was awarded to a defendant who<br />
had defamed the plaintiff on the World Wide Web). Waving some judicial<br />
magic wand Judge Davis awarded Mr Trkulja the princely sum of $3,000 by<br />
way of compensatory damages. Mr Trkulja was also compensated $960.50 for<br />
his own costs (as a self represented party) together with interest of $104.40.<br />
46. Lest you should think that the County Court is the only court where damages<br />
might be somewhat less than expected I would also refer you to the case of<br />
Amanatidis v Darmos 50 . In that matter Ms Anastasia Darmos caused to be<br />
delivered to one person, and personally delivered to a priest, a letter containing<br />
defamatory material of the husband and wife plaintiffs concerning the<br />
disposition of the assets of a family member.<br />
Ms Darmos was the male<br />
plaintiff’s sister. The relevant deceased was their father. The case was hard<br />
fought with silk and junior for the plaintiffs and a Mr P. Darmos appeared for<br />
Ms Darmos. The judgment does not record whether counsel for the defendant<br />
was related to her although Wilson QC, for the plaintiff, alleged that there was<br />
further aggravation caused by the manner in which the defendant’s case was<br />
46 Trkulja v Trajkovska [2010] VCC 0010<br />
47 [2002] VSC 220<br />
48 [2008] VCC 1507<br />
49 [2008] VCC 1161<br />
50 [2011] VSC 163<br />
<strong>Gary</strong> <strong>Hevey</strong><br />
<strong>Gordon</strong> & <strong>Jackson</strong><br />
<strong>9225</strong> <strong>8075</strong> <strong>9225</strong> <strong>7333</strong>