Miss Bartlett Seeks Writ Of Injunction (Press, 18 July 1972)
This is a Generative AI summary of this newspaper article. It may contain errors or omissions. Please note that the language in the summary is reflective of the original article and the societal attitudes of the time in which it was written.
Summary: Miss Bartlett Seeks Writ Of Injunction (Press, 18 July 1972)
On 17 July 1972, the Supreme Court in Wellington, presided over by Mr Justice Haslam, adjourned a case involving Miss Patricia Maureen Bartlett, a primary school teacher from Lower Hutt, who sought an injunction to prevent the publication of the "Patricia Bartlett Cookbook." The case was set to continue the following day. The defendant in the case is Alister Taylor, a Wellington-based publisher. Miss Bartlett's claim asserts that the cookbook contains material directed at her, which she believes to be criminally libellous, portraying her as a sexual deviant engaged in perverted practices. She expressed concerns about the potential for significant distress and embarrassment resulting from the book's publication. Through her counsel, Mr G. W. Alderdice, Bartlett highlighted that she has been actively involved in campaigning for amendments to legislation aimed at curbing the publication of pornographic materials, thus adding weight to her concern regarding the book. During the proceedings, Mr Alderdice noted a challenge in substantiating the claim, as the evidence presented in the affidavit relied largely on hearsay. He acknowledged that Miss Bartlett had not seen the book and was acting in good faith based on the information available to her. The main objective of her legal action was to avert what she believed would be both embarrassment and criminal libel if the book included the material she feared. Justice Haslam remarked on the urgency of the matter when it was brought to his attention the previous Friday; however, he indicated that he was not fully aware of the application's merits. He decided to postpone the matter, allowing for further discussion regarding its scheduling. Shortly after the adjournment, Mr Alderdice requested that Miss Bartlett's application replace another case scheduled for the following day. Justice Haslam complied, instructing that counsel could seek a new date from the registrar instead. Mr H. C. MacNeill represented Mr Taylor during the hearing. The court's considerations reflect ongoing tensions in the realm of publication rights, personal reputation, and the extent of legal remedies available in response to perceived harms from published works.
Important Information
The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact
The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand