Previous 5 / 101 Next

28/09/2023, 14:44 Barilaro v Google LLC [2022] FCA 650 The Secret Dictatorship video Mr Barilaro’s reaction to the Secret Dictatorship video [81] [92] The Super Barilaro Kart video [101] The Italian Job video [104] Google as a publisher [112] YouTube’s policies or guidelines on allowable content [112] Google becomes aware of friendlyjordies attacks on Mr Barilaro [129] Google becomes a publisher of the matters complained of [137] The bruz: eternal video [146] Google’s delay in removing the adverse reviews of Dungowan Estate [174] Mr Barilaro files this proceeding [176] The He’s Destroying Australia video [187] Google files its defence [194] Mr Shanks settles the claims against him [200] The bruz: withdrawal video [204] The impact on Mr Barilaro of strangers’ online abuse linked to Mr Shanks’ YouTube campaign [208] Further steps leading up to the hearing [216] The 22 December 2021 video [220] https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2022/2022fca0650 5/101

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Barilaro v. Google LLC

Case Law

Country

Australia

Country Location

Latitude: -24.13114257073859

Longitude: 135.63642619925068

Country Location (linked Case Law): Australia

Decision Date: 6 de jun. de 2022

Case Status: Closed

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Admissible
Motion Granted

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Injunction or Order Granted
Monetary Damages/Fines

Keywords

Defamation / Reputation
Digital Rights
Instagram Community Guidelines>Hate Speech, Bullying and Abuse
Intermediary Liability

Judicial Body: Federal Court

Case Number: [2022] FCA 650

Case Summary: The Federal Court of Australia has ordered Google LLC to pay AUD $715,000, as damages to John Barilaro, the applicant who was the target of defamatory content and false imputations on YouTube in violation of the law. John Barilaro, the former Deputy Premier of New South Wales, filed a defamation suit against Jordan Shanks and Google Incorporation due to a relentless, racist, vilifying, abusive, and defamatory campaign run by Mr Shanks on YouTube. However, during the legal proceedings, the applicant and Mr Shanks reached a settlement. The Court observed that individuals involved in politics take on the risk of being subjected to harsh public criticism, which might be acceptable as freedom of expression, but not even politicians are expected to be subjected to abuse, hate, racism, and defamation merely because they operate in the sphere of public interest. The Court also noted that the platform on which content is published (the publisher) has certain liabilities regarding content that violates the law as such violations can result in the imposition of aggravated damages against the publisher.

Related Caselaw (self)

Australia

Collection

CIPIT

Date Updated: 28 de set. de 2023

Primary Documents

Barilaro v Google LLC [2022] FCA 650.pdf
English
Download View

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

Select target paragraph3

Barilaro v. Google LLC

Primary Documents

Notifications