Thurston v Fox Sports Australia Pty Limited [2025] FCA 54

Federal Court of Australia Thurston v Fox Sports Australia Pty Limited [2025] FCA 54 File number(s):

Judgment of: HALLEY J

Date of judgment: 7 February 2025

DEFAMATION – multiple publications – where applicants part of a group ejected from National Rugby League (NRL) match – whether certain broadcasts conveyed defamatory imputations to the effect that each applicant is racist and racially vilified or racially abused or made "vile racist remarks" towards a NRL player – overall impression created in the minds of the ordinary reasonable viewer – whether publications conveyed guilt or suspicion of guilt – meaning of "racist" – first, fourth and fifth matters complained of conveyed pleaded imputations DEFAMATION – defence – justification – whether pleaded imputations substantially true pursuant to s 25 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) (Act) – whether "sledging" directed to NRL player contained racial element – where respondents sought to rely on other conduct of applicants as evidence of the kind of conduct the applicants engaged in inside the stadium – imputations not substantially true Catchwords: DEFAMATION – defence – statutory qualified privilege – whether first respondent's broadcast was published on an occasion of qualified privilege pursuant to s 30 of the Act – whether first respondent's conduct in publishing the broadcast was reasonable – where satisfied viewers had an interest or apparent interest in receiving information on relevant subjects – where information available to first respondent was the report of alleged racial abuse – where subsequent reporting could not justify a finding that first respondent's conduct was reasonable in the broader circumstances – conduct of first respondent not reasonable DEFAMATION – defence – honest opinion – whether the matters expressed in the imputations were the honest opinion of employees or agents of the first respondent rather than a statement of fact pursuant to s 31 of the Act – whether opinions of first respondent's broadcasts were based on matters that were substantially true or published on an occasion of qualified privilege at common law – where dissemination of reports of alleged racial abuse sufficiently proximate to original disclosure – defence established DEFAMATION – remedies – assessment of compensatory damages for non-economic loss