Callum Godde, AAP
A high-profile lawyer has been dressed down in court as exiled Victorian Liberal MP Moira Deeming’s defamation battle with Opposition Leader John Pesutto heads for trial.
In a procedural hearing neither attended on Friday, Justice Michael Wheelahan scheduled a 10-day trial for the case in the Federal Court from September 16.
Mrs Deeming’s case consists of 67 alleged imputations made by Mr Pesutto in media releases, press conferences and radio interviews after she attended a rally in March that was gatecrashed by masked men who performed Nazi salutes.
A 15-page dossier distributed by Mr Pesutto’s office to MPs and media as part of an initial push to expel her from the Victorian Liberal’s parliamentary ranks also forms part of Mrs Deeming’s evidence.
Mr Pesutto has conceded two of the 67 alleged imputations were defamatory but will argue they are substantially true.
Justice Wheelahan expressed concern about the state of Mrs Deeming’s case, taking her barrister Sue Chrysanthou SC to task.
“The first publication, the media release, in its first form comprises 18 lines,“ he said.
“Eighteen lines and you’ve come up with 23 imputations.“
The alleged imputations vary from Mrs Deeming supporting white supremacists and neo-Nazis, Mrs Deeming holding abhorrent white supremacist and neo-Nazi views and Mrs Deeming being a neo-Nazi.
“What’s the difference?“ Justice Wheelahan asked.
“How many ways are there of saying the same thing.“
Mr Pesutto maintains he never accused the now-independent MP of being a Nazi or having Nazi sympathies.
Ms Chrysanthou said the imputations all conveyed different levels of seriousness.
A narrowing of the meanings would ensure she was not “barking up the wrong tree“ at trial and save her client and the defence time and money, she argued.
“Both parties appear to be well-armed, with respect,“ Justice Wheelahan shot back.
Mr Pesutto’s lawyers will mostly rely on the honest opinion defence, which entitles speakers to express an opinion shown to be substantially true, as well as contextual truth and qualified privilege.
His 57-page defence flags his team will try to limit damages if those arguments fail by suggesting he repeatedly and unequivocally publicly stated he does not believe Mrs Deeming “to be a neo-Nazi, a white supremacist, or anything of similar substance or effect“.
Mrs Deeming’s repeated assertions that Mr Pesutto suggested she is a Nazi or a Nazi sympathiser have “likely to have caused damage to her own reputation“, his lawyers claim.
During Friday’s first hearing, Mr Pesutto’s barrister Matt Collins KC stepped through the events of the Let Women Speak rally, arguing it had been “hijacked“ by neo-Nazis with a “disgraceful“ banner.
But even that description is disputed, with Ms Chrysanthou suggesting the neo-Nazis were there for a “completely different rally“.
Dr Collins was initially attracted to the idea of a separate hearing to rule on the “extraordinary“ number of alleged imputations, but has since decided it would likely lead to more costs and delays.
“There’s no knockout blow available to either party here,“ he said.
Justice Wheelahan stopped short of ordering Ms Chrysanthou’s team to revise its case but will raise the issue when the matter returns to court on April 26.
