Page:Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited (Trial Judgment).pdf/263

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

rape), particularly given the vagueness of what was perceived to be the most important component of her allegations, was dismissed as being a counsel of perfection demonstrating naïveté as to the way that politics and journalism works. The "worldly" approach of Network Ten was to support someone perceived from the start to be a victim of two wrongs and, in the absence of verifiable facts, to "read between the lines".

928 Despite any suggestion to the contrary, to deprecate the general approach adopted by Network Ten and Ms Wilkinson in this case is not a counsel of perfection, nor does it somehow lack sophistication.

929 The Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) (the industrial association successor of, among other things, the Australian Journalists Association), binds its members to the MEAA Journalist Code of Ethics (Code). The Code has a very long history and, as Callinan J observed in Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd [2001] HCA 63; (2001) 208 CLR 199 (at 305–306 [268]) "[f]rom time to time, the [Code] finds its way into evidence in defamation cases". Although the Code is not in evidence in this case, and under MEAA's rules (registered with the Fair Work Commission), it only applies to MEAA journalist members (which does not include the Project team), I raised with the respondents whether the Code is a useful guide to the responsible and reasonable conduct of journalists.

930 I did so because as can be seen from Section K.1 above, the question as to whether the relevant conduct is "reasonable in the circumstances" is determinative of this defence; and after making findings as to the circumstances, when one comes to the process of evaluation, the court may take into account the specified s 30(3)(a)–(i) factors, but also "any other circumstances that the court considers relevant" (s 30(3)(j)).

931 Deconstruction and particularism abound in submissions made by defamation practitioners when considering reasonableness. But in this, like in other areas of the law, one must be astute not to "seek a false certainty" by seeking out some defining element given that it is "human behaviour that is to be evaluated and characterized": for a discussion of this topic, see the Hon J L B Allsop, 'The Judicialisation of Values', Speech to the Law Council of Australia and Federal Court of Australia FCA Joint Competition Law Conference Dinner, 30 August 2018.

932 Without detracting to the guidance as to norms of behaviour and considerations provided by the text of s 30(3), as I said in the cross-claims judgment (at [33]), the governing notion of


Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited (Trial Judgment) [2024] FCA 369
255