Barilaro v Google LLC [2022] FCA 650

Federal Court of Australia

Barilaro v Google LLC [2022] FCA 650 File number(s): NSD 484 of 2021

Judgment of: RARES J

Date of judgment: 6 June 2022

Catchwords: DEFAMATION – where matters complained of were videos uploaded on YouTube – where respondent became liable as publisher after being notified of their defamatory content – where respondent belatedly abandoned all defences – where respondent had no belief in truth of matters complained of or imputations – where respondent failed to take down matters complained of and other videos uploaded by creator knowing that they contained defamatory and offensive attacks on applicant and his lawyers – where matters complained of contained racist, hate speech and cyber-bullying material – where matters complained of were part of creator / former respondent's campaign using multiple videos uploaded on YouTube against applicant – where applicant former Deputy Premier of New South Wales – where respondent's campaign drove applicant prematurely from public office DEFAMATION – where creator uploaded matters complained of on YouTube before respondent became aware of them so as to be publisher – where many views of matters complained of in period before respondent became liable as publisher – whether damages discounted because of earlier publications when respondent not publisher DAMAGES – compensatory and aggravated damages – where defamation a most serious case – where matters complained of were racist, hate speech and cyber-bullying – whether publisher's conduct improper, unjustifiable or lacking in bona fides – where respondent published and failed to take down further racist, hate speech and cyber-bullying videos in campaign against applicant despite maintaining that it had policies against such publications – where publisher persisted in hopeless defences until commencement of trial – where publisher failed to apologise – whether cross-examination of applicant unjustifiable – Held: aggravated damages awarded CONTEMPT OF COURT – contempt not in the face of Court – where respondent and former respondent published videos calculated to bring improper pressure to bear on applicant and his lawyers to abandon proceeding