Manly mother to appeal $120,000 defamation judgment

A mother ordered to pay $120,000 after being found to have defamed a strata committee chairman is preparing to appeal the decision. Patricia Murray’s representative said she is “disappointed” and “extremely concerned” by the decision.

The judgement was released last week.

• Battlelines drawn over planned nine-level harbour home in Seaforth
• Taste of Manly back for 33rd year this weekend on northern beaches

A mother ordered to pay $120,000 after being found to have defamed a strata committee chairman is preparing to appeal the decision.

The NSW District Court found Patricia Murray, from Manly, defamed 78-year-old Gary Raynor in a series of emails when they lived in the same block in Victoria Parade in 2017.

She was represented in court by top barrister Sue Chrysanthou, who represented Geoffrey Rush in his recent defamation case, and solicitor Hugo Aston.

“Obviously she is disappointed with the decision and extremely concerned with the $120,000 damages awarded against her,” Mr Aston said.

“There is also the burden of costs. She’s raising two teenage daughters and her mother is unwell. I certainly feel for her.

“I can confirm that we are lodging a Notice of Intention to Appeal.

The letterboxes at the front of the unit block

“We will carefully review and analyse the Judgement over the coming days and consider our position after that has occurred. It is likely we will be lodging an appeal.”

The defamation proceedings arose from a spat in the autumn of 2017 over the use of her letterbox.

Mr Raynor, who still lives in the block, sent all residents an email warning them to keep their letterboxes locked after they were targeted by thieves.

He attached an article from the Manly Daily, which had a warning from police about letterbox theft in the area.

Ms Murray responded to the email in “derisive terms” the District Court Judge Judith Gibson found, which led to a back and forth email exchange.

Mr Raynor said he feared criminals were able to cut a master key by examining the inside of Ms Murray’s unlocked box, which was putting other residents at risk.

“Your assertion/s that a single unlocked mailbox has allowed a criminal milieu to stalk the … [apartment complex], and spend the time necessary to copy barrels/locks in order to then construct a master key is farfetched [sic],” Ms Murray replied in an email on May 25, 2017.

“May I suggest, given your email hobby, that you may want to elect to have things such as banking statements and the like provided to you in e-Statement format to avoid physical mail being delivered to you.”

She concluded: “To avoid further harassment, I’ve not replied to your provoking mailbox emails. However your consistent attempt to shame me publicly is cowardly.

“It is also offensive, harassing and menacing through the use of technology to threaten me. Please stop!”

The property in Victoria Parade, Manly

Mr Raynor’s barrister argued the email defamed him as it made him out to be “a small minded busybody who wastes the time of fellow residents on petty items”.

He said her emails suggested Mr Raynor “unreasonably harassed” her by “consistently threatening her by email” and “acted menacingly” towards her.

He also claimed her emails suggested Mr Raynor had copied in other residents to his emails in order to “publicly humiliate her”.

District Court Judge Gibson, in a written judgment issued last week, concluded Ms Murray had defamed Mr Raynor.

“It would be fair to say that every sentence of the defendant’s email in reply struck a blow at the plaintiff, and was intended to ridicule and humiliate him in every way,” she said.

“A substantial award of aggravated damages should be made by reason of the strong evidence that the defendant’s conduct was improper, unjustifiable and lacking in bona fides.”

Mr Raynor said it was “a relief” to get the judgment but said he feared the matter was not concluded.

“It has been going on for two years,” he said.

Asked what it had been like, he added: “I’ll leave you to imagine.”

IN OTHER NEWS