Latest news with #vilification
ABC News
4 days ago
- Politics
- ABC News
Mark Latham defends conduct towards MP Alex Greenwich at final day of tribunal hearing
Independent MP Mark Latham has told a tribunal that members of parliament "have disagreements all the time", as he defended his recent use of social media during a vilification and sexual harassment case brought by Sydney MP Alex Greenwich. Mr Greenwich is suing the former federal Labor leader in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT), alleging four public statements by Mr Latham breach the state's Anti-Discrimination Act. One of the statements — a tweet posted by Mr Latham in March 2023 which referenced sexual activity in explicit terms — has already been found by the Federal Court to be defamatory. Mr Greenwich was awarded $140,000 in that case. Mr Latham's tweet came after Mr Greenwich gave a comment to a journalist describing Mr Latham as "a disgusting human being", when was asked about violence towards LGBT protesters who had gathered outside a church where Mr Latham was expected to speak. On the final hearing day, Mr Latham was cross-examined by barrister Prue Bindon, for Mr Greenwich, about his employment status around the time of the tweet. Mr Latham agreed he resigned in early March 2023 and was a candidate for the One Nation party. Ms Bindon took Mr Latham through One Nation documents which recorded payment including $2,500 to Mr Latham, which Mr Latham believed was a refund of earlier expenses. Mr Greenwich's legal team raised recent posts from Mr Latham on Twitter, now X, and expressed concern that if there are future references to the primary tweet or evocations of similar language, the harm to their client may be exacerbated. Mr Latham's lawyer Zali Burrows complained about the "endless affidavits" being filed in the case. Senior member Mandy Tibbey said "it's desirable there be a cessation of hostilities between the parties", suggesting they could reach some kind of undertaking before the tribunal makes its final decision. In one recent post, Mr Latham suggested that the NCAT case involved an "absurd proposition" that Mr Greenwich should "never be publicly criticised". Today he told the tribunal: "Clearly members of parliament have disagreements all the time." He said his recent online activity was responding to issues raised in parliament, claiming there had been "two-and-a-half years of misrepresentations" about him and there came a point where he was entitled to respond. Earlier, Mr Greenwich's husband Victor Hoeld, told the tribunal he was "very concerned" about the impact of public statements on Mr Greenwich. But he said he tried to not watch "every single media clipping" or item in the media. "It's very distressing to watch Alex struggle or be talked about … it's been going on for two years," Mr Hoeld said. "It's had a big impact on my life. "I try and avoid triggering events and interviews like that and watching them because of the effect it's had on me and Alex … it's basically changed everything." Outside court, Mr Greenwich told the media he was "really relieved the hearing process is now over". Each side will now give written submissions to the tribunal in late October.
News.com.au
6 days ago
- Politics
- News.com.au
Mark Latham warned no more delays will be granted in harassment and vilification case
Mark Latham has been warned that no further delays will be granted after he failed to show up in court for a harassment and vilification case against him. Independent Sydney MP Alex Greenwich launched proceedings against Mr Latham in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal over allegations of homosexual vilification and sexual harassment. The case centres on a homophobic tweet made by Mr Latham and further comments he made on Twitter (now known as X) and in radio and newspaper interviews. The NCAT proceedings come after Mr Latham was ordered by the Federal Court to pay Mr Greenwich $140,000 over the tweet and further defamatory comments. Justice David O'Callaghan ruled that the primary tweet could convey the meaning that Mr Greenwich 'engages in disgusting sexual activities'. Mr Latham's defence of honest opinion and common law qualified privilege was dismissed. Mr Greenwich was expected to give evidence in the NCAT hearing on Monday; however, Mr Latham's lawyer Zali Burrows successfully pushed for an adjournment after she argued it was important for Mr Latham – who was unable to attend – to be there for the key witness's evidence. '(It's) important Mr Latham is here in this tribunal,' Ms Burrows said. 'Mr Latham wants to be here.' Mr Greenwich's barrister Prue Bindon said her client had been 'ready to give evidence several times' but ultimately did not oppose the adjournment, noting it was important the hearing be dealt with in a timely manner. Senior legal member Mandy Tibbey ruled it was appropriate to grant the adjournment given Mr Greenwich was a key witness. 'Given that the respondent is a party and this is the evidence of the other main witness, we determine that it is appropriate to agree to an adjournment,' Ms Tibbey said. However Ms Tibbey said she would not agree to any further delays, telling the court that Mr Latham had access to material for 'some time' now and he therefore should be able to instruct Ms Burrows. 'As long as the applicant (Mr Greenwich) is here we will be proceeding,' Ms Tibbey said. Mr Greenwich is set to give evidence on Tuesday, with Mr Latham expected to attend. Ms Bindon earlier claimed that Mr Latham's comments had incited hatred, contempt or severe ridicule during her opening submissions. She said the sexual harassment allegations were in relation to unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature in circumstances where a reasonable person would've anticipated it to cause humiliation or intimidation and was not to do with unwanted sexual advances. Ms Bindon also anticipated the defence would claim Mr Greenwich's reputation was to some extent not damaged.
News.com.au
16-06-2025
- Politics
- News.com.au
Mark Latham loses attempt to excuse barrister in NCAT homosexual vilification and sexual harassment case
Former NSW One Nation leader Mark Latham has lost an attempt to recuse a barrister presiding over a harassment and vilification case against him, after arguing her views on transgender people could affect her ability to be neutral. Independent Sydney MP Alex Greenwich has launched proceedings against Mr Latham in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal over allegations of homosexual vilification and sexual harassment. At the centre of a case is a homophobic tweet made by Mr Latham, as well as further comments he allegedly made in interviews for a newspaper, radio, and on Twitter (now known as X). The proceedings in the NCAT come just months after the Federal Court in defamation proceedings ordered Mr Latham to pay $140,000 to Mr Greenwich over the homophobic tweet in question, as well as further defamatory comments made in publications. Mr Greenwich's lawyers had argued in the Federal Court that the tweet could be understood to mean the MP 'engages in disgusting sexual activities' and that he 'is not a fit and proper person to be a member of the NSW parliament because he engages in disgusting sexual activities'. The Federal Court found the first point was conveyed and defamatory, but not the second, and dismissed defences of honest opinion and common law qualified privilege by Mr Latham's lawyers. Mr Latham was ordered to pay Mr Greenwich $100,000 for non-economic loss, and a further $40,000 for aggravated damages. Appearing at NCAT on Monday, Mr Latham pushed for one of the two senior legal members presiding over the case, Mandy Tibbey, be recused from the case over concerns her views on transgender people could affect her impartiality. Taking the stand, he pointed to an academic lecture by Ms Tibbey, which examined issues of the acceptance of transgender people in the Anglican Church, and the potential role of anti-discrimination laws in church laws surrounding sex, gender and sexuality. In the academic piece published online, Ms Tibbey called suggestions that being a transgender person, or having treatment or gender reassignment surgery is 'not the Christian way' are 'misguided', among other statements and analysis. Mr Latham argued the NCAT case involved 'identity politics', a topic which he claimed both Mr Greenwich and Ms Tibbey were advocates for, but that stands against and claims is 'divisive'. Mr Latham asked how Ms Tibbey could 'possibly be neutral on this matter', and said he was in a state of 'disbelief' that she had been allocated the case. 'I would've thought it's not so hard for NCAT to ensure … those hearing the matter are absolutely neutral,' Mr Latham said. 'Beggars belief.' His impassioned submission was interrupted at one stage, where Ms Tibbey reminded the court this was 'not an opportunity for Mr Latham to grandstand and foreshadow his argument'. Mr Latham's lawyer Zali Burrows further argued documents tendered about Mr Latham opposing Mr Greenwich's equality bill – which was referred to as the transgender bill in court – could lead Ms Tibbey to have a negative view of her client. 'The main concern is that your views are potentially going to be perceived by the fair minded person more in line with the applicant … as opposed to the respondent,' Ms Burrows said. Ms Tibbey told the court the case had 'nothing to do with transgender people', and later determined it wasn't appropriate for her to recuse herself.
