‘Salacious gossip’ or news? MP to test new privacy law

Stories about the origins of a tennis star-turned-politician’s relationship with his wife will be a “test case” for Australia’s privacy immunity for the media.

Victorian Liberal deputy leader Sam Groth sued the Herald Sun in late July over a series of stories questioning when he began his relationship with his now wife Brittany.

Three News Corp stories continue to appear online, including the original article by journalist Stephen Drill titled “How the Liberal Party is courting controversy with Sam Groth”.

The Groths claim the articles are defamatory and violate Ms. Groth’s privacy under federal tort laws that took effect in June.

Professional journalists and media publishers are exempt when collecting information for publication or publication of material “of a news, current affairs or documentary nature.”

At a hearing in the Federal Court on Thursday, Groth family lawyer Sue Chrysanthou SC argued the stories were “obscene gossip” and not news.

“We want to cross-examine the journalist,” he said.

“In particular, we want to reveal all the information the journalist had at the time of publication, in order to show that they did not receive a single piece of information from anyone who had first-hand knowledge of the circumstances of the relationship with my client at the time they met.

“And any basis or first-hand basis to allege that there is a reasonable allegation that my client, Mr. Groth, was involved in a crime when he first began his relationship with his current wife and the mother of his two young children.”

The federal parliament argued that simply looking at the evidence in the articles was not enough, as it included the element of the content being “newspaper material”.

“Obviously the parliament thought that not all publications that claimed to be news were news,” Ms Chrysanthou said. he said.

Matt Collins KC, an equally high-profile lawyer for broadcaster News Corp, is pushing for the exemption issue to be resolved before the case goes to trial.

Dr Collins argued that the publications were sufficient for the court to decide whether immunity should apply.

“We’re talking about an article on the front page of the state’s best-selling newspaper on political issues about the person who aspires to be the state’s deputy premier,” Dr Collins said.

“Does this constitute news? This is the first time this question has been raised.”

Judge Shaun McElwaine noted that U.S. courts have grappled for years trying to reconcile the right to privacy with the First Amendment, which protects freedom of the press.

After the hearing on November 6, he will decide whether the privacy exemption of the case can be discussed before the hearing.

The judge sarcastically predicted that if the privacy element was split, it would be “inevitable” that the losing party would appeal the decision and tear up the case.

“I can see what’s going to happen,” he said, laughing.

“This is basically a test case. This is the first time this provision has been considered.”

Regardless of the decision and the mediation hearing on November 7, the hearing will continue for 10 days from May 11.