VIP
Senior Member
- Joined
- 1 Jul 2022
- Messages
- 1,918
- Reaction score
- 2,025
Former Channel Seven sports reporter Josh Massoud has lost a court bid to overturn a decision dismissing his defamation suit against five media outlets over a series of reports on his suspension and subsequent dismissal from the broadcaster after he threatened a junior colleague.
In a decision on Thursday, the NSW Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against a decision of District Court Judge Judith Gibson last year and ordered him to pay costs.
His lawyers alleged the newspaper, radio, television and online stories defamed him by wrongly suggesting he threatened to slit a young colleague’s throat or made graphic threats to kill him.
The parties agreed Massoud told an 18-year-old colleague during an abusive phone call in May 2018: “If you weren’t so young, I’d come up there and rip your head off and shit down your throat.”
The junior colleague in question, Jack Warren, had mistakenly run part of an exclusive story by Massoud on Twitter before the 6pm news bulletin. Warren, the son of Seven Brisbane’s news director Neil Warren, told the District Court the story was not tagged as an exclusive.
Court of Appeal Justice Mark Leeming, with whom Justice Anna Mitchelmore and Acting Justice Carolyn Simpson agreed, said in a written judgment on Thursday that the crux of Massoud’s claim was that “his reputation was harmed by ... [reports] stating that he had been dismissed following his threatening that he would slit the throat of a young colleague, when in fact he was dismissed following his threatening that he would rip off the head and shit down the throat of a young colleague”.
But Leeming said Massoud “was intimidating Mr Warren” and it was clear that his words were not intended to be taken literally.
“He was not threatening in fact to rip off Mr Warren’s head and defecate down his throat. Likewise, if Mr Massoud had said that he would slit Mr Warren’s throat, he would not have been understood as in fact threatening to do that,” Leeming said.
Gibson had found 14 of the 16 publications conveyed imputations that he threatened a young colleague with violence, threatened to slit a junior colleague’s throat or made graphic threats to kill him.
The Court of Appeal said it could proceed on the basis that each of the 14 publications conveyed that he either threatened to slit a colleague’s throat or made graphic threats to kill him.
Gibson found the media outlets could rely on a defence of justification, meaning the publications were substantially true.
The Court of Appeal said Massoud had “failed to establish error” in that approach. In addition, it found that the defence of honest opinion covered a secondary imputation conveyed by Fox Sports, namely that Massoud “was never a respected journalist”.
In a decision on Thursday, the NSW Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against a decision of District Court Judge Judith Gibson last year and ordered him to pay costs.
His lawyers alleged the newspaper, radio, television and online stories defamed him by wrongly suggesting he threatened to slit a young colleague’s throat or made graphic threats to kill him.
The parties agreed Massoud told an 18-year-old colleague during an abusive phone call in May 2018: “If you weren’t so young, I’d come up there and rip your head off and shit down your throat.”
The junior colleague in question, Jack Warren, had mistakenly run part of an exclusive story by Massoud on Twitter before the 6pm news bulletin. Warren, the son of Seven Brisbane’s news director Neil Warren, told the District Court the story was not tagged as an exclusive.
Court of Appeal Justice Mark Leeming, with whom Justice Anna Mitchelmore and Acting Justice Carolyn Simpson agreed, said in a written judgment on Thursday that the crux of Massoud’s claim was that “his reputation was harmed by ... [reports] stating that he had been dismissed following his threatening that he would slit the throat of a young colleague, when in fact he was dismissed following his threatening that he would rip off the head and shit down the throat of a young colleague”.
But Leeming said Massoud “was intimidating Mr Warren” and it was clear that his words were not intended to be taken literally.
“He was not threatening in fact to rip off Mr Warren’s head and defecate down his throat. Likewise, if Mr Massoud had said that he would slit Mr Warren’s throat, he would not have been understood as in fact threatening to do that,” Leeming said.
Gibson had found 14 of the 16 publications conveyed imputations that he threatened a young colleague with violence, threatened to slit a junior colleague’s throat or made graphic threats to kill him.
The Court of Appeal said it could proceed on the basis that each of the 14 publications conveyed that he either threatened to slit a colleague’s throat or made graphic threats to kill him.
Gibson found the media outlets could rely on a defence of justification, meaning the publications were substantially true.
The Court of Appeal said Massoud had “failed to establish error” in that approach. In addition, it found that the defence of honest opinion covered a secondary imputation conveyed by Fox Sports, namely that Massoud “was never a respected journalist”.
