Fucking Furious

[CTO]

Bust correct - he's best to chase under sexual harassment. Legal aid is worth talking too, plenty of very good layers there - I'd get a female one too!

[bust]

The fact that he has informed his manager and the response has been limited tells me she has no intention at all of taking this seriously.

 

In a way a good point for his case.

 

A serious response to his complaint would have been an open discussion with all parties, a mediator and witnesses. This clearly hasn't taken place.

 

My ex had a situation similar but not of the sexual kind so I know how these things should proceed in a professional situation.

 

This clearly has just been fobbed off as a "fuck him" kind of approach.

[ozpharlap]

OMG

 

You very obviously are not a lawyer if that's what you think. Maybe a paralegal with a 3rd class degree in law and sociology? Anyway, it's definitely time to go back to the law books before giving any more legal advice.

 

Damn, you got me! my heart is wounded, but thank god you did not call me a bush lawyer too, then I would really be upset.

 

I did not want to go into the law but let me give you a short extract (but it will be long for these posts).

 

The common law distinction between slander and libel has been abolished in all jurisdictions in Australia by the uniform defamation law (for example see (Qld) Defamation Act 2005 â?? section 7).

 

DEFAMATION ACT 2005 - SECT 7 - Distinction between slander and libel remains abolished

 

(1) The distinction at general law between slander and libel remains abolished.

 

(2) Accordingly, the publication of defamatory matter of any kind is actionable without proof of special damage.

 

At common law the principle differences between slander and libel were:

 

1. upon proof of the publication of a libel, general damage is presumed, whilst slander is, with four exceptions (not relevant here), actionable only upon proof by the plaintiff of special damage; and

 

2. slander does not constitute a criminal offence, whereas libel could constitute both a civil wrong and a criminal offence.

 

Accordingly, the publication (in any form â?? written, oral or other medium) of defamatory matter of any kind is actionable without proof of special damages.

 

For those who donâ??t know, an actionable slander (oral defamation) consists of the communication of a defamatory matter without lawful excuse to a third person, of and concerning the plaintiff, in oral or other transient form. In slander it is the very speaking of the words that constitutes the wrong and gives rise to a cause of action.

 

And as stated above, model provisions enacted in all jurisdictions has abolished the distinction between slander and libel at law and therefore defamatory matters of any kind are actionable without proof of special damages.

 

What was the position before the uniform defamation law?

 

For the purposes of the law of defamation, special damages is actual loss or damage, the direct and natural result of the defamatory publication, beyond the general damage which is presumed to have been suffered upon proof of a defamatory publication.

 

Special damage is normally, but not necessarily, actual pecuniary loss. In particular circumstances this includes social damage â?? the loss of the hospitality of friends or even acquaintances (includes work friends/acquaintances).

 

See Albrecht v. Patterson 12 VLR 821

 

Thus, even before the legislative changes if our OP could prove he was subject to ridicule or a lowering of his standard amongst friends/acquaintances he could seek monetary compensation (which on what he has written he has been). But as stated, now it is not relevant.

 

Outcome

 

This does not mean I want him to go like a bull at a gate into litigation as any advantage he had may now have been lost because he has raised the issue to both the employer and the perpetrator prior to gaining the evidentiary advantage of collecting evidence. Also, each case depends on its own facts and circumstances and whilst I believe in the OP comments on the factual basis, clients usually leave out pertinent facts.

 

This does not also mean I say he should forget it, as if he did take appropriate action the fat bitch (my assumption) would be warned to provide an unreserved apology immediately. But get an expert in defamation who would more then likely convince you to seek an apology rather then monetary gain. It doesdepend on the amount of ridicule you have received and if or not the remark se made was vindictive or just flippant.

 

And Wonderboy, to leave me in peace, even though I did not think I had too I did call two barrister friends I know and they agree with my understanding of the law.

 

But Wonderboy, I did get a laugh from your comments, feel free to PM me if you still think I am in the wrong or coninue to libel my good name here lol

 

OP, get some free advice and if it is a matter of principal, go ahead, if just for money I believe you would win on what you have said but, the lawyers will get most of it or if not, you would have to pay out of your own pocket.

 

[USVirgin]

There you go again, spouting off with all your legal mumbo-jumbo around here.

 

Haven't we already told you that you're not a lawyer?

 

I suspected somethin' was gone wrong when you started talkin' fancy words like 'defamation' instead of 'slander'.

 

Now, sir, I suggest you go back to your cozy apartment in the city with the running water and toilets, and all your high falootin lawyer and judge friends and just leave us plain folk be, ya hear?

 

[Guest lazyphil]

<>

 

yes lets, 'ozpharlap', if only we could say it

 

 

[USVirgin]

I wonder how a hello girl says, "Welcome, Ozpharlap?"

[ozpharlap]

I did not want to go into the long winded diatribe but I just felt, that the OP should be adequately advised. I am still open to being corrected by my learned adversaries.

 

I feel for the OP, I could not think of a worse insult to a man.

 

And I don't want the work, I gave up being a litigation lawyer when I found out I was a human being. But I am also fond to do a trawl down Sukhumvit Road 4 or 5 times a year when I visit.

 

Yes, you are right, the riverside apartment on the beautiful Brisbane River, looking down at the GABBA (cricket ground) with the big plasma showing the rugby league, the cool breezes, glass of red wine is good - isnâ??t life great?

 

[USVirgin]

[color:#9]I wonder how a hello girl says, "Welcome, Ozpharlap!" [/color]

[ozpharlap]

She holds on to the reigns and says, â??wow big fellaâ? (Pharlap being a horse and Thai for lightning) and Oz, well we all know that.

 

And maybe the same as all punters, 3,000 ST if she thinks I am a newbie or 2,000 if she thinks I am not sweet or stupid.

 

I actually have a funny antidote, my real name is Greg however, anyone with that name knows how difficult it is with Asian speaking people. So, I use to just say my name was Big John in my usual haunts. One day, a little favorite wait staff over heard another customer call me Greg, she got all upset thinking her true love had lied. I just took her gently by the hand, and said my sweet vixen, say my name, say my name (mimicking Peter from Family Guy), after 5 failed attempts she just blew me a kiss and said, what do you want to drink Big John (Big John being in my dreams).

 

[USVirgin]

And I don't want the work, I gave up being a litigation lawyer when I found out I was a human being.

 

I know a guy here who worked with Marvin Mitchelson (don't know if he was a junior partner or what) and he left the firm for the exact same reason, after years of hearing the woes of poor Beverly Hills housewives and then having to represent them.