Background
Matthew and Olamide Onakoya, who were self-represented, brought defamation proceedings against The Sydney Children’s Hospitals Network. On 12 June 2026, the Court fixed a five-day judge-alone hearing to begin on 30 November 2026. Before that fixture, the plaintiffs had not served a notice of intention to elect a jury, filed a notice of election, or otherwise complied with r 29.2A of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).
On 30 June 2026, the first plaintiff said he preferred a jury trial. The Court directed that any late request be made by notice of motion supported by affidavit. The plaintiffs filed their motion on 14 September 2026, relying on their ignorance of the applicable jury-election requirements.
The Court’s Holding
Campbell J dismissed the motion. Although the plaintiffs had invoked the wrong rule, the Court considered the application as if it sought an extension under r 1.12 to comply with r 29.2A. The plaintiffs’ lack of knowledge of the statutory and procedural requirements was not a satisfactory explanation for their failure to make a timely election.
A late election would also deprive the defendant of the procedural opportunity provided by r 29.2A(4) to seek an order that the matter not be tried by jury. With the trial only about two months away, permitting the election would disrupt final trial preparations, create wasted costs, and risk the allocated five-day hearing time. The Court held that those considerations, including the overriding purpose, outweighed the fact that a jury trial could physically be accommodated on the listed date.
Key Takeaways
- In NSW defamation proceedings, a party’s right to elect a jury trial must be exercised in the manner and timeframe required by s 21 of the Defamation Act and r 29.2A.
- A court may consider extending time, but ignorance of the relevant procedure will not necessarily justify relief.
- Delay matters because a late jury election can remove the other party’s opportunity to seek an order against jury trial and can disrupt an existing fixture.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that jury trial is not the default mode for NSW defamation cases where no compliant election has been made. Parties must address the issue before the hearing date is fixed, rather than assume the Court will explain available procedural options.
The plaintiffs were ordered to pay the defendant’s costs of the unsuccessful motion.