Latham ordered to pay $140,000 over defamatory tweet


A judge has ruled in favour of Alex Greenwichâs defamation case against Mark Latham. Photo: AAP
Firebrand politician Mark Latham has been ordered to pay $140,000 after a court ruled his explicit tweet exposed an independent MP to a âmaelstromâ of abuse.
The tweet stemmed from a heated online argument with independent NSW MP Alex Greenwich and conveyed the meaning that he âengages in disgusting sexual activitiesâ, the Federal Court was told.
Greenwich, who is gay and a vocal advocate for LGBTQI issues, sued the former NSW One Nation leader over the tweet sent in March 2023, days after the state election.
On Wednesday, the court ordered Latham pay Greenwich $100,000 in damages for non-economic loss and a further $40,000 in aggravated damages.
The former One Nation NSW leaderâs tweet described a sex act in explicit terms and was in response to a post quoting Greenwich describing him as a âdisgusting human beingâ.
Justice David OâCallaghan found Greenwich was exposed to a torrent of offensive and hateful messages as a result of Lathamâs tweet, despite noting that much of the material might be âthe product of people with deranged mindsâ.
âThere is no doubt that as a result of the publication of the primary tweet, for which Mr Latham offered no genuine apology, Mr Greenwich suffered a loss of standing,â he said in his judgment.
âHe was exposed to ridicule and that he experienced a significant subjective hurt to feelings, aggravated by the foreseeable âmaelstromâ.â
But the court did not accept the assertion Lathamâs tweet held the meaning that Greenwich was unfit to be a member of NSW parliament due to his sexual behaviours.
OâCallaghan also did not accept Greenwichâs claim that comments made about him by Latham to the Daily Telegraph in April 2023 were defamatory.
Latham told the journalist: âWhen he calls someone a disgusting human being for attending a meeting in a church hall, maybe attention will turn to some of his habits.â
âGreenwich goes into schools talking to kids about being gay,â he said.
OâCallaghan ruled those comments did not hold the meaning argued by Greenwichâs lawyers, that he was âa disgusting human being who goes into school to groom children to become homosexualâ.
During a two-day trial in June, Latham claimed the defamatory post was his honest opinion and a response to provocation from Greenwich.
He has admitted the tweet was crass, offensive and vulgar but denied it defamed the independent MP or ruined his reputation.
In a statement posted to Facebook on Wednesday, Greenwich said the ruling showed there was no place in Australian public life for such âTrump-style personalised attacksâ.
âThis victory is a major relief for me, my family, my staff, and the LGBTQ community. When Mr Latham published his tweet, my life changed forever. The tweet was, effectively, a reductionist caricature of me which caused me enormous damage,â he said.
âThis judgment makes Australia a safer place for me, my community, and my parliamentary colleagues. This judgment sends a clear message that you canât attack a gay person based on their perceived sexual activities; you canât cross the line when it comes to personalised political attacks, and you canât just say whatever you like online without consequence.â
The graphic post was widely criticised across the political spectrum, including by One Nation federal leader Pauline Hanson.
Before the tweet was taken down following requests by Greenwich, several responses by other users were also âlikedâ by Latham.
Those comments included a post that read, âAbout time someone didnât hold back on what everyone really thinks about these grubs.â
NSW Premier Chris Minns said he already thought the tweet was a âhorrific statementâ from Latham and âthatâs been proved today in courtâ.
The online sparring match between the two politicians followed violent protests outside a church in Sydneyâs south-west, where Latham was giving a pre-election speech in March 2023.
About 250 mostly male counter-protesters violently attacked police and 15 LGBTQI protesters who had set themselves up outside the Belfield church.
The matter will return to court on September 25 for final orders.
Lifeline 131 114
Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578
-with AAP
Want to see more stories from The New Daily in your Google search results?
- Click here to set The New Daily as a preferred source.
- Tick the box next to "The New Daily". That's it.








