Thread: Whirlpool win

Of interest to all forum users and particularly administrators and hosts

WCS Group v Whirlpool

"10th June 2015 ? Whirlpool.net.au, Australia's leading online discussion forum, has won a legal battle after it was sued by WCS Group Pty Ltd in August 2014 in the Supreme Court of Victoria. WCS alleged that Whirlpool should be held responsible for members' posts that were claimed to have created a negative impression about its financial services business. WCS has now discontinued this legal action ? effectively raising the white flag and surrendering ? and is now required to pay Whirlpool's costs."

However, it needs to be pointed out that even if, based on this precedent, a forum can be expected to win a case, it needs deep pockets to defend a similar case against a well heeled plaintiff, for example a car company.

John

Originally Posted by V8Ian

One wonders why WCS raised the white flag. Did they see an inevitable defeat or did Whirlpool have deeper pockets?
As this case collapsed before judgement was handed down I doubt it that it could be used as a precedent, so we should continue to refrain from slagging off companies and individuals.

From what i can see of the case and the law, WCS did not have a leg to stand on. Most companies, including this one, cannot sue for defamation, so they tried to bring the case under consumer law, which has no provisions that would be applicable. Initially they tried "injurious tort" but withdrew this when Whirlpool's solicitors pointed out it could not apply, so ultimately, they had no case.

However, it needs to be pointed out that th eintention was probably not to win by having a case, but to win by having deeper pockets. And this means forums such as this are much more vulnerable. (Simon Wright seems to have significant financial resources and is prepared to deploy them in this sort of case!)

What is needed is for the law to take action against lawyers starting this sort of case that clearly has no chance of success. But don't expect to see it soon - if it happened half the legal profession would be unemployed.

John