Appeal dismissed as four defamation actions to proceed together before single jury

The Court of Appeal dismissed appeals brought by the plaintiff against orders of the High Court, which had directed that four separate defamation actions against newspaper publishers be heard concurrently by the same judge and jury. The plaintiff claimed that reporting on his District Court assault case had wrongly stated he was convicted, and argued for four separate jury trials, citing differences in the articles and potential prejudice. The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's decision, finding that the key question and evidence were common to all cases, and that the risk of inconsistent verdicts and inefficient use of court resources would outweigh any potential procedural confusion. The appellate court concluded that the plaintiff’s rights to a jury trial and fair procedures were not infringed by simultaneous hearings and rejected all eleven grounds of appeal. The cost implications were left open for further submissions.