NSW: Indian dancer loses defamation action over bad review

AAP General News (Australia)
04-30-2001
NSW: Indian dancer loses defamation action over bad review

By Denise McNamara

SYDNEY, April 30 AAP - An Indian dancer who had "very little rhythm in her body" and
whose performance was "the most undancerly" a reviewer had ever seen today lost her defamation
action against a newspaper publisher.

Vimala Sarma had sued the Federal Capital Press of Australia over a Canberra Times
review which she claimed portrayed her as an incompetent dance performer.

The four-person jury in the New South Wales Supreme Court took just under an hour to
find the article, published on May 2, 2000, had implied she was incompetent.

But they agreed with the defence that such a meaning was not defamatory.

Outside the court Ms Sarma described the jury's finding as illogical and said she would
lodge an appeal.

A review of the April 30 show - designed to illustrate the theme of love - said Ms
Sarma was unable to rhythmically coordinate the different parts of her body.

"Vimala Sarma's Shringara is the most undancerly dance performance I have ever had
to review," Michelle Potter wrote.

"There was no precision in her hands and feet, no power in her trunk, no direction
in the way the body moved around the stage, no sense of focus in the face, especially
the eyes.

"Just a softness, a weakness if you like, and an incredibly frustrating mannerism where
the tongue kept flicking in and out.

"If only the mind dances and not the body, it isn't dancing," the article said.

Counsel for Ms Sarma, Clive Evatt, told the jury there could be nothing more defamatory
than to describe a professional dancer as incompetent because it "injures the plaintiff
in her profession".

"Would anyone reading the Canberra Times bother to pay money watching Ms Sarma do Indian
dancing?" Mr Evatt said.

However, Bruce Connell for the defence argued the "tough" review was of one night's performance.

"It says it's a very, very bad performance on the night. It does not say the plaintiff
can't ever dance again," Mr Connell told the jury.

There was no evidence before the court that she was a professional dancer which did
not support the argument that the implied meaning claimed by Ms Sarma caused people to
think less of her, he said.

"It's not personal, it's saying she's a poor performer, not a poor person," he said.

Justice Michael Grove ordered Ms Sarma to pay the publisher's legal costs.

AAP dmc/rp/cjh/br

KEYWORD: SARMA

2001 AAP Information Services Pty Limited (AAP) or its Licensors.