Deeming v Pesutto (No 3)

The case of Deeming v Pesutto (No 3) involved a defamation action brought by Mrs Deeming, a former Member of the Victorian Parliament, against Mr Pesutto, the Leader of the Opposition. The dispute arose from five publications made by Mr Pesutto regarding Mrs Deeming's views and actions. The primary issues for the court to decide were whether these publications were defamatory, whether they caused serious harm to Mrs Deeming's reputation, and if certain defences could be successfully invoked. The defences included public interest, honest opinion, Lange qualified privilege, and contextual truth. The court needed to assess if the defamatory imputations were true and if they were published in the public interest or constituted an honest opinion or qualified privilege.

In its reasoning, the court found that the publications in question were indeed defamatory. They conveyed significant negative meanings about Mrs Deeming's character and integrity. The court further determined that the publications caused serious harm to Mrs Deeming's reputation, as they significantly lowered her standing in the eyes of her community, her professional circles, and her faith communities. The court rejected all defences raised by Mr Pesutto, finding that none were substantiated by the evidence. Consequently, Mrs Deeming was awarded damages for the harm caused to her reputation, which included both general damages for non-economic loss and aggravated damages. The quantification of these damages was to be determined at a later date.

The court concluded that the proceeding be adjourned to a later date for the making of final orders, including the formal entry of those orders in accordance with Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.