Can't believe they'd try to sue over that. For one, it's pretty much only critical of the Mowbrays themselves and I can't see anything in there that wouldn't be an honest opinion so safeguarded by NZ law.

So it comes across to me like the Mowbrays personally trying to stomp someone into the ground with legal fees knowing they have no case. Hopefully the legal system can protect them from that exploitative use.

Seems on song with that basis of the comment, doesn't it?