Nassif v Nationwide News Pty Limited

The case of Nassif v Nationwide News Pty Limited involved a claim of defamation brought by the plaintiff, Mr Nassif, against the defendants, Nationwide News Pty Limited and others, who published an article in The Daily Telegraph, a newspaper owned by the defendants. The article in question was published on 21 December 2017, and Mr Nassif alleged that it defamed him by implying he was involved in a corrupt scheme with the former Premier of New South Wales, Mr O'Farrell. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia, presided over by Justice Bromberg.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the published article contained defamatory imputations about Mr Nassif and, if so, whether the defendants could rely on any available defences to justify the publication. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the imputations made in the article were substantially true and whether the defendants had acted with lawful privilege or justification. The court also had to consider whether the defendants had acted with actual malice, which could negate any available defences.

In delivering the judgment, Justice Bromberg held that the article did indeed contain imputations that defamed Mr Nassif by suggesting his involvement in a corrupt scheme. The court found that the imputations were substantially true, as there was evidence of Mr Nassif's involvement in a corrupt relationship with Mr O'Farrell. However, the court also found that the defendants had not acted with actual malice, as they genuinely believed the imputations to be true. Therefore, the court held that the defendants were entitled to rely on the defence of truthful publication, which protected them from liability for defamation. The court dismissed Mr Nassif's claim, finding in favour of the defendants.