Defamation Dispute Resolution Pre-Lawsuit 🔥 Legal Wizard [Australia]

Australian Capital Territory
New South Wales
Northern Territory
South Australia
Western Australia

Create this legal Document

Contact us to create this legal document.

✅ Wizard 🏗 Doc

Most Popular

Self Service

Create the document instantly yourself by entering the key details.



✅ Wizard 🏗 Doc

Most Popular

Self Service

Create the document instantly yourself by entering the key details.



✅ Wizard 🏗 Doc

Self Service

Self Service is not yet available for this document.


✅ Lawyer-Assisted

Lawyer Assisted

Create the document yourself with 30 mins help from a lawyer.



✅ Lawyer-Assisted

Lawyer Assisted

Create the document yourself with 30 mins help from a lawyer.



✅ Lawyer-Assisted

Lawyer Assisted

Lawyer Assisted is not yet available for this document.

Full Service

We create a bespoke document based on
your instructions.




Please turn your device to landscape mode to begin creating your document.

Please turn your device to landscape mode to begin creating your document.

Please turn your device to landscape mode to begin creating your document.

Please turn your device to landscape mode to begin creating your document.

Thank you! Your message has been received!
Oops! Please check your details and try again.

what does our defamation dispute resolution pre-lawsuit wizard [australia] assist you with?

Our innovative Defamation Dispute Resolution Pre-Lawsuit Wizard [Australia] includes Embedded Lawyer-Logic that will guide you to determine which related legal claims you may potentially have.

If the relevant Limitation Periods have not yet expired this process will proceed to create a DRAFT of one or more of the following legal documents to suit your situation:

Concerns Notice* regarding Defamatory Statements 🔥;

Cease and Desist Letter for Injurious Falsehood 🔥 [Step 1 ➲ Warning to Stop!];

Demand Letter for Injurious Falsehood 🔥 [Step 2 ➲ Recover Actual Damages]; and

If applicable you will be directed to contact our legal team to assist you with the preparation, filing and service of an urgent:

➲ Summons for an Injunction 🌊 Restraining Further Publication.

additional considerations

is this a matter for the police?

If applicable you will be asked to consider filing a complaint with the Police if the Publication/s:

⚖️ Unreasonably cause substantial annoyance;

⚖️ Unreasonably disrupt your privacy;

⚖️ Are of a threatening, harassing, intimidating or violent nature + you don't feel safe;

⚖️ Occur in the context of a domestic or family relationship;

⚖️ Include graphic photos of you in a private act (eg., showering or in a state of undress); +/or

⚖️ Might constitute Criminal Defamation;

Personal Defamation / Business Reputation Mitigation

In addition to your legal rights + remedies please be aware that there are also alternative actions you may take to mitigate the impact of such material when it is published online.

Public Relations + SEO

Please contact us urgently to discuss how we may best assist with a referral to enable you to take control of the narrative via positive public relations or to mitigate the damage by using Search Engine Optimization (SEO) techniques to attempt to remove the defamatory/injurious material down the search rankings so that it harder to find and is consequently viewed by less people, potentially to the point where it stops causing further damage.

takedown assistance

If applicable you will be directed to agencies who may provide assistance to take down the offensive Publication.

alternative legal claims

You may have alternative or additional legal claims to consider if the Publication/s:

⚖️ Were experienced in the workplace?

⚖️ Relate to your race, sexuality, religion or a disability?


This Defamation Lawsuit Wizard is designed to fully comply with both:

⚖️ The original non-amended WA and NT Uniform Defamation Laws; as well as

⚖️ The Model Defamation Amendment Provisions (MDAP) effective from 1 July 2021 adopted by Victoria, New South Wales, South Australia, Queensland, Tasmania and the ACT.

We recommend you contact our legal team if you are still unsure after using this Defamation Lawsuit Wizard to determine which Defamation Laws apply to your matter.

what is a concerns notice?

The Uniform Defamation Laws were introduced across all Australian States and Territories in 2005 (commencing operation during 2006).

The Uniform Defamation Laws provide for a streamlined approach aimed towards resolving disputes without the need to commence litigation by encouraging speedy settlements.

Under MDAP, from 1 July 2021, if you have been defamed you MUST give the publisher of the Defamatory Statement/s a "Concerns Notice" before* commencing court action.

According to the Uniform Defamation Laws in Australia, a notice is a Concerns Notice if it is:

✅ In writing, and

✅ Specifies the location where the matter in question can be accessed (for example, a webpage address); and

✅ Informs the publisher of the defamatory imputations that the aggrieved person considers are or may be carried about the aggrieved person by the matter in question (the "imputations of concern" ), and

✅ Informs the publisher of the harm that the person considers to be serious harm to the person's reputation caused, or likely to be caused, by the publication of the matter in question, and

✅ For an aggrieved person that is an Excluded Corporation--also informs the publisher of the financial loss that the corporation considers to be serious financial loss caused, or likely to be caused, by the publication of the matter in question, and

✅ A copy of the matter in question is, if practicable, provided to the publisher together with the notice.

If this is not practicable the following particulars should be included within the Concerns Notice:

1️⃣ The defamatory statements;

2️⃣ The date they were made; and

3️⃣ The party/parties/public they were published to.

who can sue for defamation in australia?

⚖️ An Individual; or

⚖️ An "Excluded Corporation".

serious harm threshold (new under mdap from 1 july 2021)

Individual plaintiffs must now establish that a publication has caused, or is likely to cause, ‘serious harm’ to their reputation.

For corporations entitled to sue in defamation, they must demonstrate ‘serious financial loss’.

The threshold in some respects replaces the now abolished ‘triviality’ defence and is intended to prevent the litigation of trivial or frivolous defamation claims, but arguably is more onerous a test.

Key considerations in determining whether the applicable threshold is met will include:

⚖️ The scale and extent of the publication(s) in issue; and

⚖️ The gravity of the statements made.

The threshold can be considered as a preliminary hearing on the application of the defendant.

Therefore, close consideration needs to be given to the Serious Harm Threshold when considering the merits of the claim at the outset of any defamation matter, and the Particulars of Serious Harm as a consequence of the Publication (rather than the fact of the Publication itself) must be included in your Concerns Notice.

❌ An injunction will not normally be available in cases of a Defamation Claim (made on its own) due to the overriding public policy interest in freedom of speech.

If you have any queries please contact our legal team to seek more information and additional assistance.

the general rule ➲ corporations cannot sue for defamation

The general rule under s. 9 of the Uniform Defamation Laws in Australia is that a corporation, whether local or foreign (other than an "Excluded Corporation") has no cause of action in relation to the publication of defamatory material about the corporation.

The corporation may still have a claim for Injurious Falsehood (refer below).

Individuals associated with a corporation* may still be able to sue for Defamation, even if the corporation is defamed by the same publication as the Individual.

what is an "excluded corporation"?

An "Excluded Corporation" is defined as a corporation where:

⚖️ The objects for which it is formed do not include obtaining financial gain for its members or corporators (that is a Charity); or

⚖️ A "for-profit" corporation that is:

✅ Not an associated entity of another corporation;

✅ Has fewer than 10 full-time employees^; and is

✅ Not a Public Body (that is a local government body or other governmental or public authority constituted under the law of any country).


* An Individual may include any individuals associated with a corporation (typically directors, officers or managers of the corporation, but it could be anyone associated with the corporation) even if the Defamatory Statements are made in the same publication against both the corporation as well as the Individual.

^ For the purposes of calculating the number of full-time employees:

1️⃣ The employee count is performed as at the date the Defamatory Statement is published;

2️⃣ Any part-time employees are counted as the appropriate fraction of a full-time equivalent employee;

3️⃣ "Employee" in relation to a corporation includes any Individual (Under MDAP whether or not an independent contractor) who is--

✅ Engaged in the day to day operations of the corporation other than as a volunteer, and

✅ Subject to the control and direction of the corporation.

who can sue for injurious falsehood in australia?

⚖️ An Individual;

⚖️ A Charity; or

⚖️ A Corporation.

This means that Injurious Falsehood may be claimed in addition to, or in lieu of a Defamation Claim.

It is especially important to consider when a business cannot sue for Defamation under the Uniform Defamation Laws in Australia because it not an Excluded Corporation, it may alternatively sue for Injurious Falsehood, which is also called Malicious Falsehood or Trade Libel.

Examples on an ongoing injurious falsehood might include one or more of the following:

🔥 A malicious and false online review;

🔥 A false statement that your business has closed permanently, is sold out of stock, is in financial difficulty, has been hacked, main product has major safety or performance issues etc.; or

🔥 Comparative advertising by a competitor which includes false statements about your business to make your competitor look good.

what are the elements required to establish an injurious falsehood claim?

The tort of Injurious Falsehood requires all of the following four elements to be established:

1️⃣ A false statement about the plaintiff's goods or business;

2️⃣ Publication of that statement by the defendant to a third person;

3️⃣ Malice on the part of the defendant; and

4️⃣ Proof by the plaintiff of actual damage (which may include a general loss of business) suffered as a result of the statement.

✅ If the above elements can be established, the plaintiff may also consider whether it is prudent to urgently file and serve a summons seeking urgent interlocutory relief, that is an injunction restraining the defendant from continuing to publish the injurious falsehoods.

❌ An injunction will not normally be available in cases of Defamation Claim (made on its own) due to the overriding public policy interest in freedom of speech.

who is the defendant? where does the concerns notice/letter need to be emailed/posted?

Please read our FAQ: How do I ensure I get the pre-litigation steps right? Who is the Debtor/Defendant? Where does the Letter of Demand/Statutory Demand/Concerns Notice need to be emailed/posted?

what if the defendant is not registered with asic, nor located or based in australia?

If the Defendant has no address for Service within Australia registered or otherwise, you can still proceed to send a Concerns Notice internationally.

In the event the Defendant does not respond, or disputes the Defamation Claim:

➲ Due to the complexity of international litigation, we strongly recommend you contact our legal team before taking any further steps.

offer to make amends

After being given a Concerns Notice, the party who published the Defamatory Statement/s then has the opportunity to avoid a Defamation Claim being pursued further by making an Offer to Make Amends within 28 days.

limitation periods for defamation claim / injurious falsehood claim

Please be aware of the following limitation periods by which your Claim must be filed with the Court:

⌛️ 1 year from the date of the most recent publication for a Defamation Claim (non-amended law currently applicable in WA and the NT); or

⌛️ Under MDAP, 1 year from the date of the first publication for a Defamation Claim (However, if the court is satisfied that it is "just and reasonable" to do so, the limitation period may be extended to a period of up to 3 years); and

⌛️ 6 years from the date of publication for an Injurious Falsehood Claim.

tips to collect evidence of postage + delivery

💡 Make sure you send the letter by express post and note the tracking number;

💡 Take photos of the front and back of the addressed envelope before it is posted;

💡 Log the post office tracking number number in your records, and take a screen capture or photo of the delivery confirmation, or otherwise save a copy;

💡 Keep these records in case you need these as evidence of proof of delivery in a Court or Tribunal later.

in the event of a defence/dispute

If the Defendant responds to your reminders, polite calls or Concerns Notice claiming a defence or dispute regarding your Defamation Claim / Injurious Falsehood Claim, then your next step is to consider whether the Defendant's defence or dispute has any merit and if so whether to attempt to commence Settlement Negotiation.

pearls of wisdom

In his autobiography "Chester Porter Walking on Water: A life in the Law" the late Chester Porter QC had the following to say about Defamation litigation:

Many times I advised clients not to bring defamation cases.
They are expensive, and the results are often unpredictable.
Slander is for spoken words, libel for written words.
In slander cases there can be a real dispute as to whether the words were spoken at all.

settlement negotiation

Please refer to our article: How to cast a magic legal spell? The protection afforded by Without Prejudice Settlement Negotiations.

australian media + defamation law smart list

For further reading + to access our curated links + resources on Australian Media + Defamation Law click this link to our free ➲  Media + Defamation Law -> Smart List


* Under MDAP, Defamation Proceedings cannot be commenced without first providing the proposed defendant with a Concerns Notice in respect of the matter concerned. See s.12B Defamation Act 2005 (NSW).

intellectual property rights notice

This Defamation Dispute Resolution Pre-Lawsuit Wizard 🔥 has been designed and developed with care 👨‍💻 by James D. Ford | ⚖️ Principal Solicitor of Blue Ocean Law Group.

© 2022. Blue Ocean Law Group℠.

Test your knowledge and get a discount for this document: take the Incident Report to Support a Legal Claim ➲ Quiz.

Enter the code WHen you pay full price to Purchase one of the following Self Service documents:

No items found.

Re-Enter the code at checkout each time you buy the following documents to get a discount:

No items found.


What clients say

swipe left or right to view more testimonials
We needed a really good lawyer and after doing our research we decided to contact Blue Ocean Law Group. James runs a very efficient service and has extensive knowledge of Defamation Law. Nothing was a problem. James would follow up with me regarding issues that had arisen. He dealt with each issue in a professional and ethical manner. James would explain every detail on the phone and the process could not have been easier!

Lake Macquarie Coastal Glass | Defamation Concerns Notice (NSW) [1 of 2]


Google Review not showing (Assume another AI error has occurred!)


Mar 2023

Blue Ocean Law Group's website has plenty of information in easy, layman's language that explains how Defamation Law works in Australia and from there, it was really easy to book an appointment online. James is a thoroughly professional Lawyer and it was a pleasure dealing with him. Keep up the good work, James! Cheers! ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️

Lake Macquarie Coastal Glass | Defamation Concerns Notice (NSW) [2 of 2]


Mar 2023

(Translated by Google) Lawyer James Ford was the best. He assisted me all the way through a dispute with a tenant who tried his best to extort money from the landlord due to a conflict with another tenant. James is reliable in his profession amongst lawyers in this field ... James patiently guided me, a landlord whose English is my second language, throughout the whole process ... It was because of his command that my case was turned from a disadvantage to an advantage. His charges are also very reasonable. So if you are a landlord I would highly recommend 'James Ford' to you.

Carol Ma | NCAT Landlord Tenant Dispute (NSW)




Feb 2023

Very helpful and thorough advice. James was able to explain the options available to us in detail, and the implications involved. He was knowledgeable and very professional. Would definitely go to him again.

Haim Zagroon


Jan 2023

James was very patient and understood my legal issues. He gave me the most detailed answer he could and extended the time as he wanted to give me the answers I needed. He was very knowledgeable in his area and was able to offer me insightful advice. Would highly recommend.



Dec 2022

Our case was unique. My client was based in Thailand and we needed a lawyer in Australia. After searching several firms in NSW we found Blue Ocean Law Group. James was very helpful. He explained the matter in detail via emails and on several occasions over the phone to us in Thailand. The resources on the firm's website were also very helpful in providing additional information for us. I would highly recommend James and will use him again if we need a lawyer in Australia.

Samram Laepong


Dec 2022

Great Service and very professional!

Zhang Rose | NSW Real Estate Agent + Landlord


Nov 2022

I had an urgent legal document I needed help with. The team was very helpful and professional, with a thorough understanding of the requirements. Highly recommend!

AG | 1-page NDA


Nov 2022

James was very helpful. He called back on the same day and was able to provide valuable information needed urgently. He has taken the time to explain the matter in details on several occasions over the phone and investigate the matter further on my behalf; this without costs. I would highly recommend him and will definitely use him if I need a lawyer in the future.

Roman Haverkamp | Landlord


Nov 2022

General FAQ

How do I ensure I get the pre-litigation steps right?

How do I ensure I get the pre-litigation steps right?

If you have a written agreement with the Debtor/standard terms of trade

The identity of the Debtor and their address for service (incl. email +/or fax) should already be clearly specified in the agreement, or provided by the Debtor as part of your standard business processes.

We also assume that the terms of your agreement will provide permission to serve notices via email or fax (if required).

If there is no written agreement

You will need to consider whether you already know the actual identity of the Debtor/Defendant and their address for notices/Service.

The Debtor/Defendant may not be the person with whom you made the original agreement, or the person who actually published the defamatory statement.

The person you might consider is the Debtor/Defendant may have been acting/dealing as an agent or employee of another person, the actual owner/s of the business, a sole trader, partnership, unincorporated association, company, etc.

If you only have the name of the business, you can start by conducting a free ASIC business names index + business names holder organisation/person searches to determine the owner of the business name, followed by a paid ASIC search to determine a valid + current address for Service.

If the Debtor/Defendant is a Company

Before sending a Letter of Demand/Statutory Demand/Concerns Notice to a Debtor company, we strongly recommend you conduct a paid current ASIC Company Search (min. cost $9) to confirm that:

✅ The Debtor/Defendant company is not currently under administration/in liquidation; and to

✅ Ascertain the companies current registered office address for service.

Legal Assistance

If you have any questions regarding the above please contact our legal team to discuss.


This FAQ was written by James D. Ford GAICD | Principal Solicitor, Blue Ocean Law Group℠.

Important Notice:

This FAQ is intended for general interest + information only.

It is not legal advice, nor should it be relied upon or used as such.

We recommend you always consult a lawyer for legal advice specifically tailored to your needs & circumstances.

How do I negotiate my civil dispute whilst protecting myself?

You have the right to remain silent … in your civil legal dispute

By the time you approach a lawyer to assist with your civil legal dispute you may have already discussed the matter in detail or sent text messages/emails to the other party, their agent, insurance company or lawyers.

Whilst you might think you are progressing the matter:

➲ This is generally a mistake!

Most people [unless they are experienced in litigation or legal dispute resolution] will unknowingly proceed to make these communications with the other side on an "open” basis.

This means that everything that is said or written might be capable of being used by the other parties in any subsequent legal proceedings.

We recommend you don't say or write anything until you have spoken to your lawyer

It is generally known that in any criminal matter, you have the “right to remain silent …” as this is well-covered territory on TV/Movie Legal Dramas and in the media.

When it comes to civil disputes we recommend you adopt the same position.

Our advice may be spot on when it comes to large $$ civil disputes.

Proceeding without your lawyer

When the matter is only a minor one, you may not want to go to the time and/or expense of engaging legal advice specific to your situation.

Q: How then can you proceed?

A: Very carefully, and with the assistance of some very specific legal phraseology which you may or may not have seen before.

Please refer to our blog article “How to cast a magic legal spell? The protection afforded by Without Prejudice Settlement Negotiations." for more information.


This FAQ was written by James D. Ford GAICD | Principal Solicitor, Blue Ocean Law Group℠.

Important Notice:

This FAQ is intended for general interest + information only.

It is not legal advice, nor should it be relied upon or used as such.

We recommend you always consult a lawyer for legal advice specifically tailored to your needs & circumstances.

What to consider before commencing legal proceedings?

Prior to deciding whether to commence Legal Proceedings

Laches + Limitation Periods

Please read our FAQ: What are the downsides to delaying 1️⃣ Informing the other side of my claim against them; or 2️⃣ Filing my claim with the Court?

Litigation Risk

We strongly recommend you obtain legal advice + assistance regarding:

✅ Determining whether the Debtor has the potential financial means to ultimately pay the debt + interest + legal costs should you be successful in your claim;

✅ If the Debtor is an individual, conducting a Bankruptcy Search;

✅ If the Debtor is a company, conducting a Bankruptcy Search;

✅ Determining whether the Debtor has been or is currently involved in other legal proceedings;

✅ The legal merits of your claim; and

✅ Ensuring you understand that it is extremely rare to recover your legal costs in litigation; and

✅ The inherent Litigation Risk of potential liability for the Debtor's legal costs in commencing legal proceedings in a Court, as opposed to a Tribunal;

✅ The cost + availability of litigation funding, +/or litigation insurance.

Valid + Effective Service

The requirements for valid + effective Service of a Filed Application or Statement of Claim vary depending on the relevant Court or Tribunal.

We strongly recommend you obtain legal advice + assistance regarding:

✅ The selection of the appropriate Court or Tribunal to bring suit; as well as

✅ The drafting of the required Application/Statement of Claim; and

✅ The compliant Service of same on the Debtor once legal proceedings have been filed.


This FAQ was written by James D. Ford GAICD | Principal Solicitor, Blue Ocean Law Group℠.

Important Notice:

This FAQ is intended for general interest + information only.

It is not legal advice, nor should it be relied upon or used as such.

We recommend you always consult a lawyer for legal advice specifically tailored to your needs & circumstances.

Can I insure against loss at trial in Australia?


Australian claimants looking to protect themselves against a loss at trial can now insure themselves locally instead of sourcing cover from overseas

In late 2016, Aon announced the first Australian “After the Event” (ATE) policy for claimants looking to protect themselves against a loss at trial through underwriter Ironshore Australia Pty Ltd.

ATE insurance protects claimants, whether a client or a law firm, by partially deferring payment of the premium, and payment is contingent on the success of the claim.

Eden Fletcher, National Financial Lines Placement Manager, Aon Risk Solutions Australia said this was a significant step for the Australian legal system.

“ATE insurance has been established in the UK for some time and Australian clients have been able to access the cover by going abroad. However, the overseas policies are not made with the Australian market and legislative system in mind. By being able to now access the product here, it will give clients comfort the product is fit for purpose, and is commissioned by local lawyers,” he said.
“Australia has become the most likely jurisdiction outside of the USA in which a corporation will face significant class action litigation. The risks and costs of fighting these cases are high, most are settled before they reach the courts. With a local solution now available, this provides solicitors with an opportunity to take on more cases as their client’s representative, given the client will have the protection of this insurance,” Mr Fletcher said.

The intention of this policy is not to encourage litigation, since premiums provide an incentive to settle early rather than progress deeper into trial, with the rate varying according to the stage at which the litigation is settled.

“We believe ATE insurance will be eagerly explored by law firms acting for the claimant, as it will make a higher percentage of potential class actions even more viable than present, subject to the merits of the case. When there is ATE insurance behind the case, it validates the case has a reasonable chance of success given Ironshore’s due diligence and underwriting methodology,” Mr Fletcher said.

To find out more about ATE litigation insurance:

➲ Contact Us.


This FAQ was written by James D. Ford GAICD | Principal Solicitor, Blue Ocean Law Group℠.

What are the downsides if you delay claiming legal rights?

Generally speaking, to help ensure you obtain the best possible outcome, it is recommended that as soon as practical you:

1️⃣ Proceed to obtain legal advice;

2️⃣ Instruct your lawyer to inform the other side that you have a claim against them, and attempt to settle the matter; and if this is not successful

3️⃣ Proceed to take steps to enforce your legal rights without any further delay.

Apart from the risk of the lapse of any Statute of Limitations Period, if your claim seeks equitable relief, failure to provide notice to the defendant that you have a claim and intend to enforce it, may open the door to allow the defendant to seek reliance on the equitable defence of laches, or more generally estoppel with the circumstances of the case unfolding in support of these defences the longer the defendant is able to show inaction on your part.

What is the equitable defence of laches?

Laches is a defence only available to a defendant in equity, where a plaintiff's lack of diligence and activity in making a legal claim, or moving forward with legal enforcement of a right, is viewed as conduct which allows the defendant to develop a belief that the plaintiff will not be seeking to make any claim and to continue about their life dealing with their affairs in reliance on this belief. Wikipedia

In Streeter v Western Areas Exploration Pty Ltd (No 2) (2011) 278 ALR 291 at para. [635] per McLure P considered:

"Whether the conduct of the plaintiff amounted to an acquiescence or caused the defendant to alter their position in reliance on the plaintiff’s acceptance of their actions”.

Consequently, a defendant may be able to argue the equitable defence of laches on a much shorter time frame than the relevant statutory limitation period.

In Hourigan v Trustees Executors and Agency Co Ltd (1934) 51 CLR 619 per Rich J:

The Court will not “disregard the election of the party not to institute his claim and treat as unimportant the length of time during which he has slept upon his rights and induced the common assumption that he does not possess any”.

In Gillespie & Ors v Gillespie [2013] QCA 99 MARGARET WILSON J (with whom MARGARET McMURDO P & WHITE JA agreed) at para. [79] of her judgment provided a summary of the applicable law regarding the equitable defence of Laches:

"Laches is an equitable doctrine, under which delay can bar a claim to equitable relief."
Deane J (with whom Mason CJ agreed) observed in Orr v Ford that the ultimate test is that enunciated by the Privy Council in Lindsay Petroleum Co v Hurd
“… whether the plaintiff has, by his inaction and standing by, placed the defendant or a third party in a situation in which it would be inequitable and unreasonable ‘to place him if the remedy were afterwards to be asserted’: see Erlanger v New Sombrero Phosphate Co, and also, per Rich J, Hourigan.”
The learned authors of Meagher, Gummow and Lehane’s Equity Doctrines and Remedies posit that there are two types of laches –
(i)         delay with acquiescence, where prejudice to others need not be shown; and
(ii)        more commonly, delay with prejudice to others.
However, in Fisher v Brooker Lord Neuberger said –
“Although I would not suggest that it is an immutable requirement, some sort of detrimental reliance is usually an essential ingredient of laches, in my opinion. In Lindsay Petroleum Co v Hurd (1874) LR 5 PC 221, 239-240, Lord Selborne LC, giving the opinion of the Board, said that laches applied where ‘it would be practically unjust to give a remedy’, and that, in every case where a defence ‘is founded upon mere delay… the validity of that defence must be tried upon principles substantially equitable’.
He went on to state that what had to be considered were ‘the length of the delay and the nature of the acts done during the interval, which might affect either party, and cause a balance of justice or injustice in taking the one course or the other, so far as relates to the remedy’.”
Trying the validity of the defence on equitable principles involves the balancing of equities.  
In Erlanger v New Sombrero Phosphate Co Lord Blackburn said –
“…it must always be a question of more or less, depending on the degree of diligence which might reasonably be required, and the degree of change which has occurred, whether the balance of justice or injustice is in favour of granting the remedy or withholding it.
The determination of such a question must largely depend on the turn of mind of those who have to decide, and must therefore be subject to uncertainty; but that, I think, is inherent in the nature of the inquiry.”
And in Fysh v Page Dixon CJ, Webb and Kitto JJ said –
“If a plaintiff establishes prima-facie grounds for relief the question whether he is defeated by delay must itself be governed by the kind of considerations upon which the principles of equity proceed.
If the delay means that to grant relief would place the party whose title might otherwise be voidable on equitable grounds in an unreasonable situation, or if, because of change of circumstances, it would give the party claiming relief an unjust advantage or would impose an unfair prejudice on the opposite party, these are matters which may suffice to answer the prima-facie grounds for relief.”


This FAQ was written by James D. Ford GAICD | Principal Solicitor, Blue Ocean Law Group℠.

Important Notice:

This FAQ is intended for general interest + information only.

It is not legal advice, nor should it be relied upon or used as such.

We recommend you always consult a lawyer for legal advice specifically tailored to your needs & circumstances.