In answering this question, it may be useful to know that, under Australian defamation law, the The first defendant's post was read by 4,221 people while it remained on Nitter until about 1pm on publication of material on the Internet occurs in the place where the material is downloaded or read by 12 June 2023. Internet users (Dow Jones or Co Inc . Gatwick [2002] HCA 56; 210 CLR. 575). The second defendant's post was read by 367 people while it remained on Nitter until about 5pm on 12 June 2023 . The defendants had knowledge of the falsity of the imputations contained in the posts. The imputations harmed the reputation of the plaintiff. . The defendants have not made an offer to make amends under the Defamation Act 2005 (Vic). AND THE PLAINTIFF CLAIMS: (a) An injunction. (b) Damages. Signed: ..........".""; The statement of claim was filed on 14 June 2023, along with a writ, the attachments specified in the statement of claim and the certificates required by the Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic). After filing the writ and statement of claim, Jack engaged process servers to serve them on the defendants. The process servers attended Adesina and Sade's residential address in Brisbane on 15 June 2023 but only Sade was home. Adesina and her parents had boarded a flight to Nigeria earlier that day to visit the sisters' grandparents during Adesina's university holidays and planned to be abroad for a month. The process server handed copies of the writ and statement of claim to Sade and said, "you and your sister have been served." Sade responded, "I'll give this to Adesina when she gets back." Over the next week, Minister Jim Smith's secretary, Melissa Alessandra, continued to monitor Adesina and Sade's Nitter accounts and observed that Adesina was posting daily photos of her holiday in Nigeria, confirming Sade's story. On 26 June 2023, Minister Smith received an email from Adesina and Sade's mother stating, "I can't believe you are suing my little girls! This will discourage young people from getting involved in politics. I would expect better from a Minister!". QUESTIONS (30 marks) 1. In what respect has Minister Jim Smith and his lawyer Jack Darryl breached the Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic)? What may be the consequence of their breaches? 2. In what respects was the filing and contents of the statement of claim defective under the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 (Vic) and/ or the Civil Procedure _Act 2010 (Vic)? What can the defendants do about the defective statement of claim? 3. Adesina and Sade feel they are too busy with their studies to attend court in Melbourne. Is there Activa a way for them to have the proceedings transferred to Brisbane, where they both ordinarily reside, and Go to S what is the likely result if this request was made?PROBLEM Adesina Ogbu is a 21-year-old law student based in Brisbane, Australia. After taking an elective on international climate law, Adesina became concerned about Australia's inaction on climate change. In IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA particular, she worried that Australia's reluctance to phase out fossil fuels would prevent the country from fulfilling its commitments under the Pan's Agreement - a landmark international treaty that was adopted by AT Melbourne nearly every nation to address climate change in 2015. Adesina had learnt about the treaty in class and No 234 of 2023 believed that it represented the world's last chance to stop a catastrophic rise in global temperatures. BETWEEN In early 2023, Adesina decided to take action. She and her 17-year-old sister, Sade, joined a Brisbane-based group called, Just Stop Fossil Fuels (JSFF), which campaigned for an immediate halt on new gas and coal projects in Australia. As Adesing and Sade were busy with their respective university and high school studies, they could not attend the group's physical events, which included protests outside Parliament and the offices Jim Brian Smith Plaintiff of oil and gas companies, as well as hosting public talks on the harms of climate change. However, JSFF and also ran online campaigns and Adesina and Sade agreed to help out by sharing posts on social media. Adesina Ogbu First Defendant In the morning of the 12 June 2023, JSFF sent an email to the members of its online campaign group explaining that the Australian Minister for the Environment, Jim Smith, had approved a new coal mine in Sade Ogbu Second Defendant central Queensland, after accepting a large donation from Fantini - the corporation that would run the mine. JSFF asked members to share a post on the social media platform, Nitter, with the following text "JIM SMITH CARES MORE ABOUT LINING HIS OWN POCKETS THAN THE LIVES OF YOUNG AUSTRALIANS". This text was to be accompanied by an image of a young child crying tears of blood with the JSFF logo on it, as well as a link to a newspaper article in the Melbourne Afternoon Herald with STATEMENT OF CLAIM the headline, 'Smith greenlights new coal mine amid furore over Fantini donation'. The author of the article, | Valeria Allende, is a widely respected, senior political journalist. Adesina and Sade both shared the post as directed, using their personal Nitter accounts. Adesina's post went viral It was shared over 2,000 times within the first few hours of it being online, Date of Document: 14 June 2023 particularly amongst Brisbane-based university students. Jim Smith's personal secretary, Melissa Alessandra, saw the post while doing her daily search for online mentions of the Minister. She immediately brought Filed on behalf of: Plaintiff Adesina's post to the Minister's attention. Minister Jim Smith was outraged and sent Adesing a direct Solicitor's Code: 009 message on Nitter stating, "Take this down you stupid child, you don't understand what you're talking Prepared by: about!". Upon seeing the message from the Minister, Adesina panicked and deleted the post. But Adesina Mr Jack Darryl DX: 009 couldn't get onto Sade, who was at school, so Sade's post remained online for the next few hours. Melissa Alessandra soon brought Sade's post to Minister Smith's attention as well. Just Legal Solicitors Tel No: 1800 676 The next day, Minister Smith emailed his lawyer, Jack Darryl, with screenshots of the two posts. He then 4A Collins St, Melbourne Ref: MI called Jack and said, "Look at this trash! I want you to initiate defamation proceedings against these two immediately." 1. The plaintiff is the Minister for the Environment and a Member of the Australian House of Jack replied, "Yep. You've probably got a good case here. But let's read the article first in case it provides Representatives. His office is located Suite 6, Level 2 380 Burwood Highway, Wantima South, VIC, some important context." 3152. "No" Minister Smith said. "I don't want to waste any more time. Issue proceedings in the Supreme Court immediately." At or about 9am on 12 June 2023, the first and second defendants published identical posts to the social media platform, Nitter Jack responded, "I guess even if it turns out that there's more to the article than meets the eye, this will make these kids think again before disrespecting a government minister. Do you want me to send them a PARTICULARS letter demanding an apology first." (2) Photos of the posts are attached. "No" said Minister Smith. "Go straight to issuing proceedings. I don't want to negotiate with students". 3. The wording of the posts and placement of the attached image were defamatory insofar as they As Minister Smith is the member for the Victorian electorate of Aston and he and his secretary both saw conveyed the following imputations: the Nitter posts from the Minister's Melbourne office, Jack Darryl decided to initiate proceedings in the Supreme Court of Victoria The next day, Jack drafted the following statement of claim: (2) that the plaintiff is corrupt; Activa b) that the plaintiff does not care about young Australians; and (c) that the plaintiff has or will infact harm on children. Go to