On 20 May 2021, the High Court of Australia pronounced orders dismissing an application for special leave to appeal the decision of the Court of Appeal dismissing an  appeal against the judgment obtained at trial in favour of the mass-media defendant WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd. Sue Chrysanthou SC and Barry Dean from 153 Phillip acted for WIN Television in responding to the application to the High Court for special leave and previously appeared for WIN Television before the NSW Court of Appeal.  Sue Chrysanthou appeared by herself at trial in the Supreme Court before Justice Fagan. On 22 December 2020, the NSW Court of Appeal (Meagher and White JJA, Simpson AJA) gave judgment dismissing an appeal against the judgment of Justice Fagan in the Supreme Court dismissing after trial a claim in defamation against WIN Television for a news broadcast.  The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal after upholding a notice of contention that a defence under s30 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) was established because WIN Television’s conduct was reasonable in all the circumstances.  This was a rare occasion where a mass-media defendant had succeeded in establishing a section 30 defence.  Justice Fagan had delivered judgment in favour of WIN Television after the trial on 24 March 2020. 153 Phillip congratulates Sue Chrysanthou SC and Barry Dean on this outcome. Read the full judgments at trial and on appeal: Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd [2020] NSWSC 232 Bailey v WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 352

On 17 June 2021, the High Court of Australia pronounced orders dismissing an application for special leave to appeal the decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia dismissing an  appeal against the judgment in defamation Senator Sarah Hanson-Young obtained against former Senator David Leyonhjelm. Sue Chrysanthou SC and Barry Dean from 153 Phillip acted for Senator Hanson-Young in responding to Mr Leyonhjelm’s application to the High Court for special leave. On 25 November 2019 and 30 January 2020, Justice White of the Federal Court gave judgment for Senator Hanson-Young finding Mr Leyonhjelm had defamed her in publications on 28 and 29 June 2018, and on 1 and 2 July 2018, and awarded $125,000 in damages inclusive of interest.  Senator Hanson-Young was also awarded indemnity costs for the proceedings. On 3 March 2021, the Full Court (Wigney and Abraham JJ, Rares J dissenting) dismissed Mr Leyonhjelm’s appeal from Justice White’s judgment. Kieran Smark SC and Sue Chrysanthou from 153 Phillip acted for Senator Hanson-Young at trial before Justice White and on appeal to the Full Court. 153 Phillip congratulates Kieran Smark SC, Sue Chrysanthou SC and Barry Dean on this outcome. Read the full judgments at trial and on appeal: Hanson-Young v Leyonhjelm [2019] FCA 1981 Hanson-Young v Leyonhjelm [2020] FCA 34 Leyonhjelm v Hanson-Young [2021] FCAFC 22 Sue Chrysanthou and Barry Dean also appeared for Senator Hanson-Young on interlocutory judgments as previously reported: Federal Court judgment: Hanson-Young v Leyonhjelm [2019] FCA 156 Federal Court judgment: Hanson-Young v Leyonhjelm [2018] FCA 1688

Peter Gray SC led a legal team which included Richard Potter SC from 153 Phillip, acting for the plaintiff Dylan Voller, in successfully defending appeals brought by Nationwide News and Fairfax (amongst other media companies) firstly in the Court of Appeal, and then the High Court. The High Court dismissed the appeals, confirming that the media companies are themselves publishers of defamatory comments made by third parties on the media companies’ Facebook pages. The case will now go back to the Supreme Court to determine whether the defendants have any defence to Mr Voller’s action.  Read the full judgement below: Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd v Voller [2021] HCA 27

153 Phillip Barristers is delighted to announce the appointment of Matthew Richardson as Senior Counsel in 2021.

Nassif v Seven Network (Operations) Ltd [2021] FCA 1286 Damages ordered against Channel 7 and reporter Bryan Seymour for Nissy Nassif and charity Wiping Tears for false and defamatory allegations about the conduct of the charity. Defences of contextual truth, honest opinion and fair report of public document rejected by the Federal Court. The all female legal team was led by 153 Phillip’s Sue Chrysanthou SC. Read the judgement below: Nassif v Seven Network (Operations) Ltd [2021] FCA 1286

On 14 December 2021, the Supreme Court of NSW delivered judgment and made a number of declarations vindicating the rights of CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd in relation to a suite of biometric security patents. The patents are used in a range of common applications including enabling fingerprint passwords for mobile devices. Rabih Alkadamani of 153 Phillip, with Talal Krayem, and instructed by Patterson, Hoeun & Commins, were briefed in a years’ long dispute about ownership of the patents and whether the patents were subject to any licences. In 2020, Rabih Alkadamani and Talal Krayem also obtained interlocutory injunctions restraining various defendants from representing they had any ownership interest or licence to use some of the patents. See Charter Pacific Corporation Ltd  v Securicom (NSW) Pty Ltd (No 4) [2021] NSWSC 1618 and Charter Pacific Corporation Ltd v Securicom (NSW) Pty Ltd (In Liq) (No 3)  [2020] NSWSC 20167.