Justice Michael Wigney,who was in the majority,described the case as arising out of “an unedifying episode in the relatively brief and at times controversial political life” of Mr Leyonhjelm,who seized an opportunity for “a bit of mud-slinging or muck-raking”.
“That attack was manifestly crass,offensive and obviously sexist. It employed boys’-own locker-room gossip and innuendo – of the most dubious provenance – to shame,ridicule and embarrass Senator Hanson-Young before the public at large,” he said.
In November 2019,Justice Richard White found Mr Leyonhjelm acted with malice and intended to publicly shame Senator Hanson-Young after a heated Senate debate in June 2018. The Greens senator said after the original decision she would donate the “substantial damages” to charity.
Senator Hanson-Young did not sue over comments made in Parliament,which are protected by parliamentary privilege,but over Mr Leyonhjelm’s statements in a press release and a series of interviews after the debate about weapons importation and violence against women,during which he called from the sidelines that she should “stop shagging men”.
Mr Leyonhjelm told the media,including the ABC’s7.30 program,Sky News and Melbourne radio station 3AW,that his comment was in response to an alleged claim by Senator Hanson-Young during the debate that “all men are rapists”.
“If you think they’re all rapists,why would you shag them?” he said.
Senator Hanson-Young claimed Mr Leyonhjelm defamed her by suggesting she made the “absurd” comment that “all men are rapists”. Justice White found she did not make this claim.