Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 06 JULY 2022

Contempt, defamation, and the dissemination of online poison: part one

What went wrong for Google as it abandoned defences until it was on the receiving end of a scathing defamation judgment.

AustraliaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

A two-part analysis of the recent decision of Barilaro v Google LLC [2022] FCA 650

Earlier this month, Justice Rares of the Federal Court of Australia delivered judgment in Barilaro v Google LLC [2022] FCA 650 (Barilaro) in which:

  • Google was ordered to pay Mr Barilaro $715,000; and
  • Each of Google and Jordan Shanks-Markovina (aka 'friendlyjordies') was referred to the Principal Registrar to consider whether to institute proceedings against them for what, it was said, appeared to be serious contempts of court.

This is a two-part publication:

  1. Part 1 - below - is an overview of the circumstances leading up to the judgment, including what went wrong for Google as it progressively abandoned all of its defences until it was on the receiving end of one of the most scathing defamation judgments in recent times.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from