Notice for particulars procedure “debased” in defamation action

Application by way of notice of motion - motion sought an order compelling replies to particulars without referring to O.19(7) of the Rules of the Superior Courts in the said request or in the notice of motion - affidavit of plaintiff averred that defendant had failed to reply to queries raised and that other replies were wholly inadequate - pleadings reveal that these are defamation proceedings arising from comments made by the defendant pilot concerning confidence in the aviation authorities during a T.V. broadcast on 12th August 2013 - defence in case delivered in December 2013 - first request for particulars had 46 requests - at the hearing of the motion counsel for the plaintiff initially identified that they were only pursuing five rejoinders - this was later reduced to two rejoinders during the day with a revision to a third rejoinder - tone and manner of the communications from the solicitors for the plaintiff together with the absence of a focused request from them left little scope for the defendant to reply positively - Court is firmly of the view that the plaintiff has had, since the earlier part of 2014, the necessary particulars to deliver its reply and its defence to the counter claim - a party is entitled to an order for particulars only for the purpose of ascertaining the nature of his opponents case that he has to meet, and not for the purpose of ascertaining the evidence by which his opponent proposes to prove it - Court refuses order sought in notice of motion - time extended for delivery of reply and defence to counter claim.