The previous federal opposition and NSW One Nation chief was in September ordered by the Federal Courtroom to pay unbiased MP Alex Greenwich $140,000 in damages over a tweet despatched in the course of the 2023 state election.
The defamatory Twitter publish was made throughout a heated on-line argument between the 2 politicians.
It resulted in a torrent of abuse being flung at Greenwich, who’s homosexual and a vocal advocate for the LGBTQI group.
On Wednesday, barristers for the 2 politicians appeared in courtroom as Justice David O’Callaghan was requested to completely restrain Latham from making the identical defamatory remarks.
The now-independent NSW MP has resisted the transfer, saying it will breach his implied constitutional freedom from totally partaking in political dialogue.
“You are speaking about restraining my shopper from making a remark about one other MP,” his barrister Man Reynolds SC mentioned.
Justice O’Callaghan identified that Latham might proceed to say “something he likes” about Mr Greenwich, apart from repeating the contents of the tweet or its imputation.
“He nonetheless should not be topic to that restriction,” Reynolds replied.
The decide questioned whether or not Latham must be free to say something to rival politicians, even one thing as “vulgar and uninformed” because the offending tweet.
In response, Reynolds famous this was “not a courtroom of style”.
“There may be, as everybody is aware of, quite a lot of minimize and thrust in politics,” he mentioned.
Matt Collins KC, representing Greenwich, argued there was an actual danger Latham would repeat the defamatory remark given he wished the prospect to freely criticise the Sydney MP sooner or later.
If the remark was made once more, there can be the same torrent of abuse launched in opposition to Mr Greenwich and additional damages wouldn’t be an acceptable treatment, Collins mentioned.
The comment was a private assault and never political commentary, he added.
Latham has appealed Justice O’Callaghan’s resolution, together with the $140,000 ordered in damages, and has ditched his former authorized counsel over claims they made concessions at trial that he didn’t conform to.
This included that he didn’t know, on the time of the tweet, what Mr Greenwich did within the privateness of his personal bed room.
Reynolds argued the inner-city MP ought to candidly inform the courtroom whether or not he engaged in the kind of sexual exercise described within the tweet.
“He promotes himself, as he is entitled to do, as a homosexual member of parliament,” he mentioned.
“He is been married for years. Is there actually any bone fide dispute about this problem?”
Collins has requested the courtroom to order that Latham pay indemnity prices for his shopper’s authorized invoice from working the case.
He mentioned the ex-One Nation state chief might have ended the dispute weeks after his tweet however as an alternative rejected a $20,000 settlement supply which included an “anodyne” apology.
However Reynolds questioned whether or not Greenwich was really required to pay his solicitors at Dowson Turco Legal professionals round $541,000 in authorized prices.
He additionally mentioned there was no proof to claims by the unbiased MP that funds donated to not-for-profit Local weather 200 to assist run the lawsuit must be repaid.
Justice O’Callaghan reserved his resolution on the injunction however ordered Mr Latham to pay over $7000 in curiosity to Greenwich.
An extra listening to might be scheduled to resolve the prices problem.
