The lawyer for the fiance of former political staffer Brittany Higgins has instructed the WA Supreme Court a defamation case towards his shopper will “end in tears financially,” with authorized prices doubtlessly reaching thousands and thousands of {dollars}.
Linda Reynolds is suing David Sharaz for defamation over 5 social media posts which allegedly defame the WA Liberal Senator.
The matter is about to go to trial in May, with attorneys for each Senator Reynolds and Mr Sharaz assembly earlier than Supreme Court Justice Marcus Solomon on Thursday to debate a safety for prices software.
This means Senator Reynolds would want to place up tons of of 1000’s of {dollars} to be held by the courtroom, or mortgage her house, to be able to show she will cowl any authorized prices incurred by Mr Sharaz, ought to she fail to show her case to the courtroom.
In a listening to lasting practically three hours, Mr Sharaz’s lawyer Jason MacLaurin argued the matter would “end in tears financially” for each events, irrespective of the end result, with authorized payments amassing to “hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars,” which would depart the events “financially uncomfortable.”
Senator Reynolds’ lawyer Martin Bennett retorted such issues often finish in tears by hook or by crook.
Ultimately, Justice Solomon determined to adjourn the matter, and can ship a call on the safety for prices software throughout one other listening to on Friday afternoon.
Neither Senator Reynolds nor Mr Sharaz have been current within the courtroom.
Other issues surrounding the high-profile case have been mentioned, together with the potential for mediation hearings in October or November, which, if profitable, would negate the necessity for a trial.
Outside courtroom, Mr Bennett stated that’s usually profitable when the defendant says “I apologise.”
“Apologies are one of the things that best vindicate a reputation,” Mr Bennett stated.
“Award of damages is the best a court can do because it can’t order a defamer who’s lost their defamation case to apologise.”
Mr MacLaurin additionally tried to maintain the choice of transferring the matter to the ACT Supreme Court open, arguing Senator Reynolds was suing a non-public citizen within the WA Supreme Court when the matter has nothing to do with the state.
Mr Bennett, nevertheless, argues his shopper is a senator representing the state of Western Australia.
“She lives here, her family is here, her friends are here, her parliamentary colleagues and those within the Liberal Party are here, and her connection is with Western Australia, not Canberra,” Mr Bennett stated, additionally slamming Mr MacLaurin’s argument as “irrelevant.”
Mr MacLaurin additionally questioned whether or not the Senator could be ready to pay his shopper’s prices, ought to he achieve success, given Senator Reynolds has additionally launched related authorized motion towards his shopper’s accomplice, Brittany Higgins.
The defence lawyer additionally famous assertion considerations notices had been issued by the plaintiff towards Federal Minister Tanya Plibersek, asking if the Minister would even be the goal of a defamation case.
The matter of a possible authorized menace issued to controversial blogger Shane Dowling was additionally aired, amid revelations on Thursday morning that Senator Reynolds was contemplating defamation motion towards him.
Mr Bennett stated Mr Dowling had revealed an article about Senator Reynolds on his web site, Kangaroo Court of Australia, earlier than contacting Mr Bennett earlier this week with a collection of questions for the Senator.
“I wrote back to him and said, effectively, your article’s defamatory, you know it’s defamatory, if you’re going to publish your article, you do so at your own peril,” Mr Bennett stated.
But he additionally indicated nothing would come of the menace.
“I can’t speak for Senator Reynolds,” he stated, “but you can’t sue every fringe commentator,” noting Mr Dowling is in a “unique position” over his obvious willingness to go to jail.
Mr Dowling has been imprisoned quite a few occasions for contempt of courtroom, and was as soon as described by NSW Supreme Court Justice Helen Wilson as a “zealot, and one who is legally uninformed and factually deluded.”
Justice Solomon will hand down his resolution on Friday afternoon.
Source: www.perthnow.com.au
