Sam Groth’s ambition to be premier meant articles on relationship with wife ‘not idle gossip’, News Corp claims | Victoria
News Corp stories claiming Sam Groth started dating wife Brittany while she was underage were far from “idle gossip” given the allegations were “weaponised” The broadcaster has been given evidence to a tribunal by rivals of a Victorian Liberal MP who aims to become prime minister.
The Herald and Weekly Times (HWT), reporter Stephen Drill and Herald Sun editor Sam Weir are being sued in federal court over a series of articles published in July. Groth files defamation suit as wife launches first test case new laws for serious breaches of privacy.
The articles alleged the couple met at a tennis club in suburban Melbourne and began a sexual relationship when Brittany was 16 or 17 and Sam, then a professional player, was 23 or 24, and worked as her coach, the court heard.
Sign up: AÜ Breaking News email
At a hearing on Thursday, HWT’s lawyer, Matthew Collins KC, argued that the tabloid was protected from claims under new privacy laws that allow for up to $478,000 in damages because of immunity granted to journalists.
Collins said the law clearly defines the exemption as applying to people who work as journalists, comply with applicable codes of conduct and produce material that is “of a news, current affairs or documentary nature” or “commentary or opinion”.
He said the articles were not “the kind of idle gossip one might read in glossy women’s magazines” but “exactly the kind of journalism that should be the subject of exemption”.
Collins told the court: “The journalistic material is clearly material that the editor of the Herald Sun had placed on the front page of the newspaper.”
He said the articles were in the public interest given that they concerned “a person who aspires to become the deputy prime minister of the state and has declared his aim to one day become the chief minister of the state.”
Collins told the court the information was based on information that was already publicly available, as the couple had talked about meeting at a suburban tennis club in previous interviews.
“Like it or not, the article reports that this relationship has been weaponized. This is not an abusive, all-private expose of an adulterous relationship or behavior at a private party,” he said.
“It was being weaponized in a febrile atmosphere in this province where the state Liberal party had disintegrated itself and we had a government. [which] “As everyone knows… he weaponizes information against the opposition for his own political interests.”
Collins said it was not a “good test case” for new laws because it was “a front-page article in the state’s best-selling daily newspaper with public interest elements.”
Sue Chrysanthou SC, representing the Groths, argued that the immunity question should be heard simultaneously with the hearing.
He argued that the story did not qualify as news because it was not a “true presentation of information.” He told the court it was rather “a rumor passed on by some politicians in the Liberal party last December”.
Chrysanthou said if the relationship had begun when Brittany was a minor and the matter had been reported to police, it would have been illegal to publish her name.
“The only thing that saves the defendants from a criminal charge is that the allegation was so misleading, had no basis in fact, and no one reported it to the police,” he said.
“It wasn’t even something that should have been talked about publicly, let alone published on the front page of Melbourne’s most read newspaper.”
Chrysanthou said the couple had paid their own legal fees and urged the court to proceed with the trial as planned in May.
Judge Shaun McElwaine said the case raised “difficult questions” and accepted that although it was still in its early stages, the costs involved were “significant”. He said this should be emphasized to the parties who will meet for mediation on Friday.
McElwaine reserved his decision on whether the immunity argument would be heard separately from the hearing.
