Victor outlines below why this case is of significance.

Bazzi v Dutton (2022) 289 FCR 1 concerned a high-profile defamation proceeding over a six-word tweet. The Full Court (Rares, Rangiah and Wigney JJ) allowed the appeal on 17 May 2022. In September 2022, Peter Dutton abandoned his High Court special leave application, bringing an end to the matter.

“Bazzi v Dutton is important because it is at an intersection point between two great power bases in our society, namely wealthy politicians and social media. The action was instituted by a senior government Minister against an impecunious user of Twitter.

Minister Peter Dutton alleged that he had been defamed on Twitter by Shane Bazzi. This followed on much debate (and indeed inflamed that debate), about politicians using the defamation laws, particularly via defamation actions in the Federal Court to silence political opponents, with their money and big lawyer fire power.

It was, and still is, being argued that the defamation laws should accordingly be amended to limit their use by politicians.

The case was also novel and interesting because it dealt with the limits of defamation in the context of the alleged defamatory statement being made on Twitter, and whether that statement by the “tweeter” should be read in isolation of, or in conjunction with, the newspaper article attached to the tweet.

It also examined the question of whether external societal context could be referred to, and hence affect the meaning of the publication.

A senior bench of judges, known for their particular expertise in defamation law, overturned the decision at first instance in favour of Minister Dutton, finding that he had not been defamed by Bazzi. In the absence of any legislative reform in the area so far, this decision will no doubt put the breaks on the burgeoning number of similar actions by wealthy politicians against their less well-heeled political critics.”