top of page


It’s Not Defamation. So How Did the ABC Just Get Gagged?
Most people assume that suing for defamation is the only way to stop a media outlet from publishing something about you. A lot of people also think that you can only do so if the story is false. In July 2026, the Supreme Court of NSW granted an interlocutory injunction restraining the ABC from using, disclosing or reproducing three professional athletes’ private group-chat messages. In this case, it relied mostly on the equitable doctrine of breach of confidence, rather tha
By Stewart O'Connell


How serious is "serious harm" in Australian defamation law?
Since the first stage reform to the Uniform Defamation Acts, defamation claims in Australia cannot succeed without satisfying a threshold element of "serious harm" (except in Western Australia). The legislation does not define the meaning of "serious harm". Against the background of a string of other recent decisions, the recent judgment of Latham v Greenwich [2026] FCAFC 82 has provided more certainty into how courts will interpret serious harm. Latham was an appeal from a
By Lindsey Cregan


determining serious harm could minimise defamation costs
Preliminary hearings to determine serious harm in defamation proceedings can be of clear benefit in minimising costs in defamation claims. However, defendants must act judiciously in applying for such hearings in all but the most trivial of claims. As illustrated in last year’s decision in Bottrill v Graham (No 2) [2025] NSWDC 221, a failed preliminary hearing will significantly add to, not reduce, the already high costs of defamation proceedings. Early serious harm determina
By Nathan Buck


How voices are heard in a new defamation era
The Brief has created a new legal media flagship as Australia’s defamation framework has entered a new phase. Although The Brief offers insight across all areas of legal practice, it's the area of defamation that has the most recognisable association with the realm of media. Recent reforms have sharpened thresholds, clarified serious harm, and recalibrated responsibility across publishers, platforms, and participants in public discourse. These changes do not signal a retreat
By CJ DORE


the ai-lephant in the room
In the legal world there is currently a mixture of desire for AI and doubt about what it actually is within law, and whether it provides value or pure risk. I want to address some of the conjecture about AI based on experience, and how it was used at appropriate times for appropriate purposes in the year-long build process of The Brief platform. When such a formalised industry as law has been understood and practiced within an agreed construct for hundreds of years, there wil
By CJ DORE


How voller set the scene for digital responsibility change
The litigation that came to be known as Voller v Nationwide News Pty Ltd arose out of circumstances that were already deeply confronting. Dylan Voller was a former youth detainee whose treatment in detention was exposed in the ABC Four Corners program investigation, Australia’s Shame. The broadcast revealed images and practices that shocked the public and led directly to a Royal Commission into youth detention in the Northern Territory. background Following the broadcast, Mr
By CJ DORE
bottom of page


