Name defamation plaintiff: Mallard
Speaker of the House Trevor Mallard wants named suppression lifted for the man who is suing him for defamation over a sexual assault claim at Parliament.
Mallard supports suppression of the name of the woman who made the complaint against the unnamed man, the unit she worked in, and a colleague’s name.
But, at the High Court in Wellington yesterday, Associate Judge Kenneth Johnston was told that Mallard opposed continuation of the order suppressing the name and other details about the plaintiff.
The plaintiff says so far only a few people knew who he was, and he wanted vindication for those people, not for the world at large.
He was not a public figure, and had medical grounds relating to himself and a family member, for seeking suppression, his lawyer Peter McKnight said. Mallard did not claim he could prove the allegedly defamatory statement was true.
Mallard’s lawyer, Robert Stewart, said the man’s reputation could not be vindicated if he could not be identified.
The suppression orders were made by a judge in December 2019, before Mallard was served with a copy of the plaintiff’s claim.
Yesterday, the associate judge was told the plaintiff was claiming $400,000 general damages with $50,000 punitive damages, an injunction, and costs, with a possibility that the claim could be increased.
Stewart said naming the man would not have severe consequences for him.
Mallard had made a ‘‘halfway house’’ proposal suggesting suppression continue until the start of the defamation trial.
The proposal would have meant negotiating around disadvantages to Mallard in making inquiries to prepare for the trial and looking for evidence to mitigate damages.
The proposal would also have avoided the time and expense of an extra step in the proceedings to deal with the suppression issue. The plaintiff rejected the proposal.
Mallard wanted open justice, Stewart said. The proceedings should be able to be reported properly and fully.
The judge reserved his decision.