Media Law Report: Privacy, Defamation, and Sub-Judice Contempt

This report examines a media law case involving a Canberra gossip blog, Political Insider, and its potential legal ramifications. The analysis focuses on three primary areas: breach of privacy, defamation, and sub-judice contempt. The report details how the blog's publication of information about Senator Maria Megabucks and her ex-husband, Con Merchant, could lead to legal challenges. It explores the application of Australian law, including common law and relevant legislation such as the Privacy Act 1988 and the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971, along with defenses that Political Insider could use. The report also analyzes the defamation claims related to Con Merchant and the sub-judice contempt concerning a sexual assault case involving a 16-year-old girl. It provides recommendations for Political Insider to mitigate legal risks, including the importance of verifying information, the potential for public interest defenses, and the need to avoid interfering with ongoing judicial proceedings. The report references relevant case laws, such as Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd, Giller v Procopets, Moroney v Zegers, and Harkianakis v Skalkos, to support its legal arguments and recommendations.

Running head: MEDIA LAW
Media Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1MEDIA LAW
The media law issue that arises in this case would attract breach of privacy along with
an allegation of defamation of Maria Megabucks, the present Queensland senator and her ex-
husband, Con Merchant. In addition, another critical media law issue that can be traced from
the case is that it involves a sub-judice contempt regarding the case involving the sexual
assault of a 16 years old girl, as public discussion about such a sensitive issue concerning
sexual assault of a teenage girl is likely to interfere with the administration of justice as the
case is under judicial consideration.
Breach of Privacy
a. Issue
The breach of privacy media issues concern the Canberra based gossip blog called
Political Insider. The chief advisor of Harry Highpants, the last public works Minister,
replaced by Santa Maria Megabucks, sent an email to the editor of political insider, stating
about Maria’s marital life with her ex-husband Con Merchant which was a strange
relationship with allegations of being raped by her husband, along with information on
Maria's previous occupation as the director of a family construction company that went into
liquidation in mid 90s. In this case future media issue that can crop up if the gossip blog
decides to publish the content of the email sent by the advisor of Harry Highpants who has
been replaced by Maria Megabuck as the senator of Queensland. It could be stated as an
offence of proven by the court that the defendant had not verified the information received
against Maria Megabucks and Con Merchant, thereby disseminating such false information to
damage the reputation of the plaintiff, along with invasion of privacy of the plaintiffs.

2MEDIA LAW
b. Application of law and defences
In Australia, the law of privacy is governed by the common law and also by certain
federal, state and territorial laws. Law of privacy has been segregated into four types: privacy
of communication, information privacy, bodily privacy and territorial privacy. The issue
concerned in this paper relates to privacy of communication along with information privacy.
Information privacy is related to handling and collecting data which are personal records or
credit information of people. Privacy of communication is related to security related to
conversation between people made through telephonic conversation, postal exchange, email
and various other modes of communication. Victoria Park Racing and Recreation Grounds
Co Ltd v Taylor [1937] HCA 45 (Victoria Park case) is the Australian case that was acting as
a hindrance in the growth of the privacy law in Australia until the Australian broadcasting
corporation v Lenah Games Meats Pty Ltd [2001] HCA 63 was decided where the decision
of the Victoria Park case was overruled. The court in the case of Giller v Procopets [2008]
VSCA 236 held at the aggrieved party whose privacy and reputation has been jeopardies,
must be provided with damages, for he has suffered a breach of confidence resulting into
distress and subsequently certain injury. Such aggrieved party should be given equitable
compensation as per the common law and certain special compensation under statutory law.
Defences that can be used for charges against invasion of privacy may include: a) defence
against bodily harm or damage to property; b) act authorised under law; c) such an act was
important for public interest; d) such an act is protected by privilege under defamation law.
c. Example of case laws and relevant legislation
With the case Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty
Ltd [2001] HCA 63, the privacy law scenario in Australia has changed, as cause of action for
privacy invasion was started to be considered. Along with Privacy Act 1988 being the fed3ral

3MEDIA LAW
legislation supporting privacy law, there are a few other state and territorial legislations as
well, like Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 prevalent in Queensland.
d. Recommendation to Political Insider
It is suggested that Political Insider at this instance should be aware of its loophole for
which it can be held liable for invading the privacy of Maria Megabucks and for defaming
Con Merchant, along with handling the charges for sub-judice contempt. The gossip blog
needs to state that the publication of the information that they receive from a trusted source
was vital to generate public opinion about people like Con Merchant along with making the
common people aware of the background of their Senator. For beaching the privacy of Maria
Megabucks, Political Insider must state that it was done for making the people aware about
the hardship of their Senator and also about her struggling background. It could defend itself
by stating that such statements were published to jeopardise Ms Megabucks’s privacy; it was
done in good faith.
Defamation
a. Issue
The rape case against Con Merchant repairing Maria Megabucks was dismissed by
the magistrate for a lack of prima facie case. Therefore any allegations pertaining to such
dismissed rape case constitutes a breach of privacy as well as an instance of defamation
where by Con Merchant is being maliciously defamed for certain purpose. Senator Maria
Megabucks's right to privacy has been infringed in this case by disclosing her conversation
with her psychologist regarding her strange relationship with her husband. Reassessment of
such old information, out of which some are not authentic or confirmed to be true, constitutes
that there is a malicious intention behind breaching Maria Megabuck's privacy and defaming
Con Merchant

4MEDIA LAW
b. Application of law and defences
Defamation on the other hand is governed by common law which works to protect
people from losing their reputation due to false allegations. As per the law of defamation, a
claim can only be established for an action under defamation, if it is proved that: i) a
defamatory information was published, ii) the person defamed could be easily recognised by
such deformity information and iii) such defamation information has affected certain damage
to the defamed person. By establishing these factors a person so defamed for personal space
has been invaded shall be able to provide remedy under common law as well as statutory law.
To defend oneself for defaming another, the following defences can be used: a) beneficial to
public interest; b) the information is true; c) related to a social cause or has a legal purpose; d)
it is protected by privileges
c. Example of case laws
While for defamation, it is still governed by the Common law and does not have a
federal legislation till date. The famous case of Moroney v Zegers [2018] VSC 448 is an
example where the defendant was awarded $887,027 in damages for defamatory emails sent
against him. In Wagner v Harbour Radio [2018] QSC 201 the court had considered the
defamatory statements to be extreme serious nature for it was alleging the plaintiff about
multiple deaths; an award of $3.7 million given to the plaintiff.
d. Recommendation to Political Insider
Political Insider should prepare itself for defamation charges that would be eventually
brought by Con Merchant for publishing such defamatory statements against him. The blog
must state that it was important for generating public opinion about Con Merchant, who is
involved with public service projects like developing Highways. It could also be stated by the

5MEDIA LAW
blog that such publication was not defamatory for hey were all true and was made as an
honest opinion.
Sub-judice Contempt
a. Issue
A sub-judice contempt regarding the case involving the sexual assault of a 16 years
old girl, as public discussion about such a sensitive issue concerning sexual assault of a
teenage girl is likely to interfere with the administration of justice as the case is under judicial
consideration. This is likely to give rise to a sub-judice contempt where the court can start a
proceeding against the gossip blog suo moto, if it feels that the judicial proceedings have
been disturbed by such publication
b. Application of law and defences
Sub-judice contempt is an offence under the Common law which refers to the
publication of material regarding cases which are under consideration of the court and
publication of information about such pending case could interfere with the administration of
justice. Publication of such sensitive information often leads to a situation termed as ‘trial by
media’ where the judgements of the court may be coloured by the influence of media and
public opinion. Therefore, to save a matter from being ambushed by public opinion and
media influence, the courts take severe action against sub-judice contempt. The only defence
of a sub-judice contempt can be to cite that the publication was crucial for public interest and
national security; however, the courts rarely accept any defensive statement regarding a sub-
judice contempt.
Therefore, in this case, Political Insider may cite the above-mentioned defences to
defend itself. It could state that publication of such information is significant for forming

6MEDIA LAW
public opinion about Con Merchant, who is involved with public service projects like
developing Highways.
c. Example of case laws
Harkianakis v Skalkos (1997) 42 NSWLR 22 is an instance where the court had held
the defendant liable for sub-judice contempt, thereby interfering with the administration of
justice. Similarly in John Fairfax & Sons Pty Ltd v McRae (1955) 93 CLR 351, the court had
held the defendant for similar contempt.
d. Recommendation to Political Insider
As for the sub-judice contempt, the blog should defend itself by stating that the
information about the sexual assault of the teenage girl was necessary to be shared for
highlight the bad character of Con Merchant to the public at large.

7MEDIA LAW
References
Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd [2001] HCA 63
Giller v Procopets [2008] VSCA 236
Harkianakis v Skalkos (1997) 42 NSWLR 22
Invasion of Privacy Act 1971
John Fairfax & Sons Pty Ltd v McRae (1955) 93 CLR 351
Moroney v Zegers [2018] VSC 448
Victoria Park Racing and Recreation Grounds Co Ltd v Taylor [1937] HCA 45
Wagner v. Harbour Radio [2018] QSC 201