13 March 2019

Defamation: Cato v. Manaia Media

Lawyer Kristin Cato alleges Horse & Pony magazine defamed her in published comments subsequent to a private mediated settlement which smoothed over antagonism between team members of a senior New Zealand equestrian team competing in Australia in early 2017. 
Ms Cato, also known as Kristin Manson, was lawyer acting for complainants.  Details of the rift between team members were never made public.  Following mediation: team chef d’equipe Jeff McVean agreed to a life ban from Jumping New Zealand with all complaints withdrawn; daughter, Olympian Katie Laurie, acknowledged unacceptable behaviour and apologised. Mr McVean has represented Australia at Olympic level.
Ms Cato alleges a subsequent article in Horse & Pony was defamatory; labelling her behaviour as unethical and unprofessional.  This followed a press release being published on the website of iSpyHorses, a media outlet controlled by Ms Cato’s mother.
At a pre-trial hearing in the High Court, Justice Hinton was asked to rule whether Horse & Pony’s article was at law capable of having a defamatory meaning to the extent it suggested Ms Cato was responsible for releasing a statement that was damaging to Mr McVean and Ms Laurie.  At law, it was, Justice Hinton ruled.  Whether in fact it was defamatory has not been decided.
Justice Hinton rejected Ms Cato’s claim that Horse & Pony also defamed her by suggesting she ‘misused’ her position as lawyer for the complainants, acting unethically in releasing a public statement to her mother about the private mediation for publication on iSpyHorse’s rival website.  To complain another publication ‘scooped’ the story is not defamatory, Justice Hinton ruled.  This was a case of ‘sour grapes’ by Horse & Pony.  Lawyers distribution of media releases does not have to be impartial as between media outlets.
Cato v. Manaia Media Ltd – High Court (13.03.19)
19.055