Trkulja v Google (No 5)

The case of Trkulja v Google (No 5) was heard in the Federal Court of Australia, where the plaintiff, Mr Trkulja, sought damages for defamation against the first defendant, Google, and the second defendant, a blogger who had published a defamatory statement online. The defamatory content originated from a blog post that was accessible via a search engine operated by Google. The primary issue before the court was whether Google could be held liable for the defamatory content under the defence of innocent dissemination, as provided for in the Defamation Act 2005.

The court examined the statutory defence of innocent dissemination and whether Google had acted without knowledge of the defamatory content. The court considered the extent to which Google was involved in the publication process, the measures taken by Google to prevent the dissemination of defamatory content, and whether Google could be considered a publisher or merely a distributor of the content. The court also assessed whether Google had taken reasonable steps to remove the defamatory content upon being notified of its existence.

The court held that Google did not have actual knowledge of the defamatory content and had taken reasonable steps to prevent its dissemination. The court found that Google could not be considered a publisher of the content, as it did not exercise editorial control over the blog post. Consequently, the court concluded that Google was protected by the defence of innocent dissemination. The court further ruled that the plaintiff's claim against Google was unsuccessful, and the jury's verdict in favour of the plaintiff was set aside. The application for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was refused, leaving the matter open for potential further appeal or proceedings.