Posted
Senator David Leyonhjelm says he will fight Sarah Hanson-Young’s accusations of defamation “as far as it goes” and has claimed the case is “about getting publicity”.
Key points:
- Leyonhjelm says he will continue to fight Hanson-Young defamation case
- Says case has no basis and he stands by everything he has said
- Hanson-Young launched the action last month, accusing Leyonhjelm of attacking her character
Senator Hanson-Young launched the defamation action last month, accusing Senator Leyonhjelm of attacking her character and causing her “considerable harm” in statements he made about her views on men.
But outside of court ahead of the first hearing on the matter, Senator Leyonhjelm said there was no basis for the case and has stood by his claims that her move is “primarily about getting publicity”.
“I don’t believe she was defamed and I stand by everything I said,” Senator Leyonhjelm said.
“This is in our opinion [is] primarily about getting publicity.”
Senator Leyonhjelm also said Senator Hanson-Young offered to settle the case if he payed her $75,000.
“It would’ve involved me saying I was wrong and I’m not admitting I was wrong,” he said.
Lawyers for Senator Hanson-Young allege Senator Leyonhjelm repeatedly accused her of making “the absurd claim that all men are rapists”.
In documents lodged to the Federal Court, her lawyers accuse him of defaming her by suggesting she is a “misandrist” and a “hypocrite”.
They alleged Senator Leyonhjelm made the remarks “in order to hold her up to public shame and disgrace”.
The dispute was prompted by parliamentary debate about violence against women, in which the Greens senator alleged Senator Leyonhjelm had told her to “stop shagging men”.
When Senator Leyonhjelm refused to withdraw those comments and went further in his criticisms of Senator Hanson-Young in media interviews, she accused him of “slut shaming” her.
Leyonhjelm’s ‘conduct’ continues daily: lawyer
Senator Hanson-Young’s lawyer Sue Chrysanthou suggested Senator Leyonhjelm was continuing to defame her client.
Ms Chrysanthou said an amended statement of claim would be filed given Senator Leyonhjelm’s “conduct… including today”.
“The difficulty is your honour, Senator Leyonhjelm’s conduct takes place on a daily basis … we have to keep adding to the particulars of aggravation because they arise on a daily basis,” she said.
Ms Chrysanthou also appeared to suggest that other senators could be called as witnesses as to what was said on the floor of the Senate.
But Senator Leyonhjelm’s lawyer, Anthony Morris QC, argued it was not the court’s place to make a decision on what was said in Parliament and to do so would go against precedent dating back to 1688.
Accusation is ‘ambiguous and confusing’
Senator Leyonhjelm’s lawyers will argue that Senator Hanson-Young’s accusation that he was “slut shaming” her was “ambiguous and confusing”.
In documents lodged in the Federal Court, lawyers for Senator Leyonhjelm allege Senator Hanson-Young used a series of interviews about his comments for “self-promotion” and to enhance her public profile.
They argue the matter will enhance Senator Hanson-Young’s reputation among her supporters and therefore it will benefit her and her bid for re-election.
“She’s achieved substantial publicity as a result of her accusation levelled at me about slut-shaming and sexism,” Senator Leyonhjelm said outside of court.
“Presumably it will be good for her re-election chances, so my suspicion is that was her primary motivation from the start.”
Senator Leyonhjelm’s defence also argues that because he and Senator Hanson-Young are at “polar extremes of the political spectrum” nothing he said would alter the opinions of anyone who held her “in favourable esteem”.
A crowdfunding campaign to cover Senator Hanson-Young’s legal costs, launched on her behalf, has so far raised more than $60,000.
Senator Leyonhjelm said his lawyers offered to settle with Senator Hanson-Young if she agreed to pay his legal bills.
The Liberal Democrat senator was today seeking a date for a hearing to have the matter struck out on the basis that the Greens senator’s claim is “vexatious” and “frivolous”.
The hearing was adjourned until next month.
Topics: greens, government-and-politics, federal-government, courts-and-trials, law-crime-and-justice, adelaide-5000, sa, australia
