The High Court decision in the Voller case concerns whether a publisher can be held responsible for comments readers post on its website. Specifically, the decision applies to Facebook but would appear to apply equally to any social media publisher, potentially including this website. Indeed, The Conversation seems sufficiently concerned to shut down all comment and discussion on the case in question – an over-reaction perhaps.
Source: Careful What You Say ! – » The Australian Independent Media Network
Faruqi, a former editor of pop culture site Junkee and a former Greens candidate, launched his libel action last year after the former leader of the Labor party accused him of “aiding and abetting Islamic terrorism” and fostering “anti-white racism in Australia”.
But Justice Michael Wigney on Thursday rejected Latham’s 76-page defence and ordered him to “start from scratch” in trying to justify comments about Faruqi in a video on the Outsiders TV program last year called “The Rise of Anti-White Racism and Terrorist Plots in Australia”.
via Mark Latham’s ‘extraordinary’ defence in Osman Faruqi defamation case struck out | Australia news | The Guardian
Generally speaking it is not considered good form for politicians to sue other people or institutions for defamation or insults largely because our democratic arrangements and wherever the Westminster system of government adheres, grants politicians open slather to lie, mislead, defame, insult and ridicule within the confines of the parliament under the shroud of parliamentary privilege with absolute protection from legal redress or from being sued. For a politician then to seek to sue when they are defamed or insulted tends to tip the balance of what is fair and reasonable very much in their favour.
Vote for Sophie (or else!) – » The Australian Independent Media Network
The damages section also claimed that the newspaper’s labelling of Rush as “King Leer” and “Bard behaviour” ridiculed Rush and damaged his reputation.
Special damages alleged were that Rush would suffer “economic loss”, his reputation would be “irreparably harmed” so that he would be “shunned by employers in future” and he was asked to quit as AACTA president.
Geoffrey Rush defamation suit: What the court documents reveal about the actor’s claims – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)