Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 v Dowling (No 2)

In the matter of Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 v Dowling (No 2), the Federal Court of Australia was tasked with granting interlocutory relief against the defendant, Dowling, for his continued publication of defamatory material. The plaintiffs, Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, sought an injunction against Dowling, who had been properly served and was aware of the court listing. The crux of the dispute was whether Dowling's continued defiance of previous court orders for removal of defamatory content, coupled with the absence of any defence of justification, warranted the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The court also had to balance Dowling's freedom of speech with the plaintiffs' right to protect their reputations.

The legal issues before the court included the appropriate circumstances for granting an interlocutory injunction in defamation cases, especially in light of the defendant's awareness of previous orders and his continued non-compliance. The court had to consider whether the balance of convenience favoured the plaintiffs, given the absence of a defence of justification and the potential for irreparable harm to the plaintiffs' reputations. Additionally, the court needed to determine the appropriate form of relief to ensure compliance, given Dowling's prior defiance of court orders.

The court found that the balance of convenience heavily favoured the plaintiffs. Given that Dowling had been properly served and was fully aware of the court's previous orders for removal, his continued publication of defamatory content constituted contempt of court. The court also noted that there was no defence of justification available to Dowling. The court granted the plaintiffs' application for an interlocutory injunction, substituting a performance order in lieu of the previous removal order, ensuring that Dowling complied with the court's directives. The court referred the matter of Dowling's contempt to the registrar for further consideration under the Supreme Court Rules.

The court ordered Dowling to immediately cease publication of the defamatory content and to comply with the substituted performance order. The matter of Dowling's contempt of court was referred to the registrar for further consideration. This decision reinforces the importance of adhering to court orders and the court's willingness to grant robust interlocutory relief to protect individuals' reputations from defamatory content.