Search
This area does not yet contain any content.
Justinian News

Sofronoff stripped bare ... Deceit ... Betrayal ... Drumgold hung out to dry as a result of Sofronoff-Albrechtsen information "tryst" ... Latest derailment of conspiracies about the prosecution of manosphere darling, Bruce Lehrmann ... Derangement syndrome ... Sofronoff's "serious corruption" ... Devastation among devoted Banana Benders ... Read more >>

Politics Media Law Society


Bag lady ... Don't call the results until the fat lady sings … Senator's criminal record hidden from view … Inspiration from our B-grade business leaders … Forget the sexual harassment, Dicey Heydon is coming out of the deep freeze ... Read on >> 

Free Newsletter
Justinian Columnists

Capital crimes ... Dangerous words likely to be scrubbed from the Trump era lexicon ... Musk and his techie vandals ... The shredder going full blast at the FBI ... Stolen national security documents sent back to Mar-a-Lago ... Cabinet clown show ... White supremacy unleashed ... Consumer protection prosecutions dropped ... Lawyers and law firms threatened ... Roger Fitch from Washington ... Read more >> 

Blow the whistle

 

News snips ...


This area does not yet contain any content.
Justinian's Bloggers

London Calling ... Law n Order in Blighty ... King invites the King for State visit ... Grovels aplenty ... Magistrate over does the "send him down" ... Musos strike an angry chord about AI encroachment ... Law shops protect the billable hour ... Floyd Alexander-Hunt files ... Read more >> 

"True to form, the ACT corruption watchdog has put itself at the centre of perceptions of bias with a finding against eminent former Queensland judge Walter Sofronoff KC that serves only to debase the definition of serious corrupt conduct."

The Australian with its unique perspective on "bias" ... March 22, 2025 ... Read more flatulence ... 


Justinian Featurettes

Judgment for sale ... Melbourne University Publishing's decision to produce Justice Lee's Lehrmann judgment as a commercial product is not without its problems ... The omnishambles continues ... Melbourne lawyer Nilay B. Patel explains ... Read more >> 


Justinian's archive

Defamation and other misadventures ... So sexy, said the actress of the Chief Justice ... Daphnis dunks women in hot water ... Another (male) judge frocks-up ... Inside Madge's mouth ... Stephen Archer defamed ... David Levine strangles more English ... Justice Dean Mildren "the idiot" ... From Justinian's archive, April 22, 2004 ... Read more >> 


 

 

« Who is the real Inspector Clouseau? | Main | Weasels on the march »
Friday
Dec042015

Salaciousness disguised as gravitas

Book launch news ... Defamatorium ... Launch by Justinian's editor of David Rolph's steamy, yet scholarly, work on defamation law ... Cocktails and nourishment turned on by Gilbert + Tobin ... Historic occasion on which a book launch was not performed by Michael Kirby 

Peter Leonard (Gilbert + Tobin), the editor-at-large, M. Kirby and Dr David Rolph, at the launch of "Defamation Law"

I agreed to launch David Rolph's book Defamation Law, on condition that I didn't have to read it. 

This is in keeping with the army of book reviewers who invariably don't read the books they are reviewing. 

Why should this occasion be any different? After all, as is Michael Kirby's custom, the first thing I did was to check the index, only to be disappointed.

So, I thought it would be a fitting moment to give my views about defamation and leave the book to one side. 

After all, the cover doesn't exactly lure the reader to explore too deeply. Yet, after some furtive delving I discovered something. 

David Rolph has produced a steamy, racy, bodice ripper of a book hiding inside a serious, scholarly, detailed, authoritative legal text. 

It's as though English stockbrokers in the early 1920s on the Sevenoaks train to London were reading Lady Chatterley's Lover in a plain brown cover. 

Here we have the full unexpurgated Ettinghausen v APC, Rivkin v Amalgamated TV, Advanced Hair Studios v TVW Enterprises, ABC v Hanson, Abbott v Random House

Salaciousness disguised as gravitas. 

It's the entire cast of characters that have made David Rolph what he is today. 

What we also find is the brilliant way Dr Rolph has turned himself into a one man celebrity defamation echo vortex. 

Various of his students at the law school have graduated into the refined campus of journalism where their first port of call in reporting court proceedings involving media defendants is to ring Dr Rolph for a comment. 

Hence you see reported by Michaela Whitborne in The Sydney Morning Herald perspectives that you're unlikely to get elsewhere: 

"Associate Professor Rolph said this is a complex case, and the outcome is unpredictable ..."

In turn this has made David Rolph a household name. Tradies on building sites, fitters and turners, sheet metal workers are often heard to say over their quail-in-aspic sandwiches at lunchtime, "Did you see what Doc Rolph told the Telegraph on qualified privilege"? 

As they say on Radio National, at least he has started to unpack a conversation about defamation and the fetters on the media. 

One thing he has brought to the fore is the declining quality of defamation plaintiffs. Whereas previously the caper was confined to professional people, serious public figures and captains of industry, now the ranks of plaintiffs are clogged with jail birds, strip club operators, notoriously corrupt politicians, bikies and Muslim protesters. 

The whole concept of reputation has changed. Now everyone has one, which makes life much harder for the free press and the freedom to get stuck into despicable people. 

In the early days of my organ Justinian, I used to go down as see Hugh Keller at Dawson Waldron, until ultimately he said, "I can't advise you. I can't give you answers to whether it's safe to publish or not. Maybe. Maybe not." 

If only, in those days we'd had David Rolph's scholarly book by our side to bring clarity to confusion. 

If anything his book is a pointer to the shocking shortcomings of our defamation law, a law stuck in the age of the golf club notice board that  does not reflect the reality of what is happening with digital publishing.

Our courts and legislators are well behind the curve in their response to information technology. 

The courts even think that search engines can be treated as publishers of defamatory statements and this applies even where the operator of a search engine is not on notice. 

More than anything the internet with its army of bloggers requires the response of a single publication rule, a serious harm test, someone to work out a contextual truth defence, a responsible journalism defence and an end to the unworkability of the High Court's efforts in Lange

These are much more pressing issues for journalists, publishers and their legal advisors than amending the Racial Discriminate Act or other misplaced culture warrior ideas of improving free speech. 

The 2005 reforms to defamation unified, nationally, a lot of old and quite poor law. It's unlikely that an attorney general, who's idea of free speech is to spy on citizens and send journalists to jail if they stumble upon something deemed to be a "special intelligence operation", will lead the charge. 

But a campaign is needed to end defamation as a mugs game. David Weisbrot and the Press Council have signalled that they are interested in  giving the reform agenda a push and this may be the moment for the media to take it seriously. 

I want to congratulate David on another important and splendid book, his fourth on media law. 

And I'm more than happy to tip some of Gilbert + Tobin's sparkling refreshment over the cover and sent it down the slipway of retail triumph. 

Defamation Law by Dr David Rolph, Thomson Reuters 

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
Member Account Required
You must have a member account on this website in order to post comments. Log in to your account to enable posting.