Thurston v Fox Sports Australia Pty Limited [2025] FCA 54

Thurston v Fox Sports Australia Pty Limited [2025] FCA 54

The pleaded imputations that the applicants made vile racist remarks towards Brent Naden and were ejected for doing so by police were carried in the Channel 7 News Item and the Channel 7 Tweet. The respondents failed to establish the truth of these imputations: robust and even offensive sledging by the applicants did not, in context, rise to racial abuse or vilification. No adequate defence of justification, qualified privilege or honest opinion was made out by Channel 7 or Seven Network. Each applicant was awarded $200,000 in compensatory damages. The claims against Fox Sports and Channel 9 were dismissed as Fox Sports succeeded on its honest opinion defence and none of the pleaded...

Parties
Applicant: William Thurston; Applicant: Cherokee Townsend; Applicant: Joshua Renner; First Respondent: Fox Sports Australia Pty Limited; Fourth Respondent: Channel Seven Sydney Pty Ltd; Fifth Respondent: Seven Network (Operations) Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for applicants against fourth and fifth respondents; dismissed against first, sixth, seventh, and eighth respondents.
Legal Topics
Defamation—publications and Imputations, Defences—justification, Qualified Privilege, Honest Opinion, Damages—non Economic Loss, Injurious Falsehood, Media Law—news Reporting of Allegations, Australian Sports Law—racial Vilification
Defamation Defamation—publications and Imputations Defences—justification, Qualified Privilege, Honest Opinion Damages—non Economic Loss Injurious Falsehood Media Law—news Reporting of Allegations Australian Sports Law—racial Vilification

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 55 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Thurston

Applicant

Cherokee Townsend

Applicant

Joshua Renner

Applicant

Fox Sports Australia Pty Limited

First Respondent

Channel Seven Sydney Pty Ltd

Fourth Respondent

Seven Network (Operations) Limited

Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the publications conveyed defamatory imputations that each applicant is racist and racially vilified or made 'vile racist remarks' towards an NRL player
  2. 2 Whether the pleaded imputations were substantially true (defence of justification)
  3. 3 Whether Channel 7 or Fox Sports could rely on statutory qualified privilege or honest opinion

Ratio Decidendi

The pleaded imputations that the applicants made vile racist remarks towards Brent Naden and were ejected for doing so by police were carried in the Channel 7 News Item and the Channel 7 Tweet. The respondents failed to establish the truth of these imputations: robust and even offensive sledging by the applicants did not, in context, rise to racial abuse or vilification. No adequate defence of justification, qualified privilege or honest opinion was made out by Channel 7 or Seven Network. Each applicant was awarded $200,000 in compensatory damages. The claims against Fox Sports and Channel 9 were dismissed as Fox Sports succeeded on its honest opinion defence and none of the pleaded...

Court Disposition

Judgment for applicants against fourth and fifth respondents; dismissed against first, sixth, seventh, and eighth respondents.

Orders

  • Judgment in favour of applicants against Channel Seven Sydney Pty Ltd and Seven Network (Operations) Limited for specific pleaded imputations; damages of $200,000 awarded to each applicant jointly against those respondents; pre-judgment interest to apply under s 51A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)...