Between 2014 and 2018, Australia earned the title of “world defamation capital”, recording 10 times as many libel claims as the UK on a per-capita basis.
[1] Australia's common law is nationally uniform, and so principles and remedies for defamation are broadly consistent across the States and Territories.
[2] The decision of Lange v ABC is an example of a case where Australia's constitutional free speech protections were assessed in the context of a defamation proceeding.
In 2005, the Australian states and territories agreed to adopt uniform defamation laws in order to promote consistency across jurisdictions.
Recognizing the rapid technological advancements, especially the rise of social media and internet search engines, these reforms aim to modernize defamation laws.
The proposed reforms introduce a new 'innocent dissemination' defense for intermediaries, such as search engines, that unintentionally host defamatory material.
Intermediaries can also offer "prevention steps" as a form of amends, which includes actions like removing or blocking the defamatory content.
[18] Remedies available if a defamation action is successfully pleaded include damages, injunctions, and in some instances an apology or retraction.
As a consequence, the court, referencing the mandatory provisions of the Defamation Act, determined that Hooper had not met the necessary pre-filing requirements.